ego concept

[Maguru]

IMO the ego is a concept. It is useful in determining our inner (spiritual) workings that are difficult to describe. However, there have been many references to ego that infer the ego is like a separate entity inhabiting our bodies, eg. "because the ego is too proud to be put aside or managed" and "ego hates being in the present moment."
This in turn gives ego a mind of its own that is constantly at odds with self.

We only have one mind. It is all us. There is no separation. If ego thinks, we think. If ego feels, we feel. If ego believes, we believe. If ego is too proud then so are we. The ego is merely a reflection of self that we sometimes do not wish to see.

The concept of ego is to bring awareness of parts of self, e.g. behavioural patterns, thinking patterns etc.

Ego as a separate entity doesn't exist. It's just a concept to bring awareness of who we truly are being and not who we think we are being.

[bellemeadows]

Beautifully said!!!!! I agree completely!!!! Thank you for sharing, always love to hear your thoughts!!!!

Belle,

[Xanafax]

Freud considered the Ego a separate function of the brain. Along with the Id and Superego.

And consider this: If you can think about the ego, then how can you actually BE the ego?

[The Cloud]

The problem is that everything that can be said is a concept, "I" no more or less than "ego."

[Maguru]

Originally Posted by Xanafax

Freud considered the Ego a separate function of the brain. Along with the Id and Superego.

And consider this: If you can think about the ego, then how can you actually BE the ego?

Exactly. Ego cannot be me. It is just a concept used to describe part of the whole of me.
The ego represents different things to different people. It is not static. It can be inflated or deflated. It can be proud or ashamed. It can be hateful or loving.
If ego was separate, how would we know these personality traits?

[Maguru]

Originally Posted by bellemeadows

Beautifully said!!!!! I agree completely!!!! Thank you for sharing, always love to hear your thoughts!!!!

Belle,

Thankyou, Belle. It's a pleasure being able to share and being understood is the icing on the cake.

[Maguru]

Originally Posted by The Cloud

The problem is that everything that can be said is a concept, "I" no more or less than "ego."

Hi Cloud. To be honest I don't agree with you on this.

The word ego is taken directly from Latin, where it is the nominative of the first person singular personal pronoun and is translated as "I myself" to express emphasis. The Latin term ego is used in English to translate Freud's German term Das Ich, which literally means "the I".

The ego is a concept of self whereas "I" am the conceived, in the form of a human being. The ego concept is used to understand all parts of self and to recognize who this unique human-being truly is.

The problem with the concept is when the 'nasty' traits are blamed on the ego. It's much easier to say 'your ego is too proud' or 'your ego hates being controlled' etc. rather than 'you'.

The ego is made the scapegoat and absolves self from taking responsibility. As the ego and "I" are one and the same, why do we do this to ourselves?

[The Cloud]

Originally Posted by Maguru

As the ego and "I" are one and the same, why do we do this to ourselves?

But they are usually separated at two different concepts, practically speaking. "I" usually is associated with all the things we consider to be good about ourselves, and "ego" is created to cover all actions contradicting the I. The division is purely arbitrary; one could reverse the associations of "I" and "ego" very easily, saying that I am holding the ego down instead of vice versa. But neither is true, the truth being that neither exist because both are concepts. The frustrating thing being that even such a statement of truth is not strictly true, but only points to the possibility of truth.

[Judge]

I see ego as a tool, like thought and emotion.

These tools are for validating experience, reality, your life.

As with all tools, you pick them up to use and put them down when you no longer require them.

The only problem is that because we use them constantly and/or more than we need to, they become our default defining system to view reality.

They actually end up blocking most of what is really there.

Judge

[Maguru]

Originally Posted by The Cloud

But they are usually separated at two different concepts, practically speaking. "I" usually is associated with all the things we consider to be good about ourselves, and "ego" is created to cover all actions contradicting the I.

The division is purely arbitrary; one could reverse the associations of "I" and "ego" very easily, saying that I am holding the ego down instead of vice versa. But neither is true, the truth being that neither exist because both are concepts. The frustrating thing being that even such a statement of truth is not strictly true, but only points to the possibility of truth.

It's fruitless to judge either as good or bad because as you say, how would you know the difference?

The concept of "I" to which I am referring is the whole mind, body thing, and the ego is a just a concept of the mind. I can exist independantly of ego but can ego exist independantly of me?

[Maguru]

Originally Posted by Judge

I see ego as a tool, like thought and emotion.

These tools are for validating experience, reality, your life.

As with all tools, you pick them up to use and put them down when you no longer require them.

The only problem is that because we use them constantly and/or more than we need to, they become our default defining system to view reality.

They actually end up blocking most of what is really there.

Judge

Your concept of ego as a tool is a bit confusing. Don't our thoughts and emotions validate our experiences? How does ego fit into the validation and if it isn't a thought or emotion, what is it?

[Judge]

Originally Posted by Maguru

Your concept of ego as a tool is a bit confusing. Don't our thoughts and emotions validate our experiences? How does ego fit into the validation and if it isn't a thought or emotion, what is it?

Your human being has thoughts and emotions.

People think that thoughts and emotions are creations, but they discount that their own human being is also a creation.

"I'm having some thoughts and emotions"

Who is saying that?

Ego, your human being. Your physical body, name, title, past and future are your ego, your human being.

Every experience good and bad will not last, but you will always be there to validate it, through your observational point of reference, your ego.

Judge

It's a lot easier to manifest stuff, when you don't seek yourself in it

[Maguru]

Originally Posted by Judge

Your human being has thoughts and emotions.

People think that thoughts and emotions are creations, but they discount that their own human being is also a creation.

"I'm having some thoughts and emotions"

Who is saying that?

Ego, your human being. Your physical body, name, title, past and future are your ego, your human being.

Every experience good and bad will not last, but you will always be there to validate it, through your observational point of reference, your ego.

I agree that I am a creation and also my thoughts and emotions are my creation. This is different to being a concept. My concept of ego is a concept in my mind. I cannot be a concept of my own mind.

"I", in the here and now, am the product of a lifetime's experience or don't my experiences count?

Whether I will be here when my humanity ceases to exist is anyone's guess.

[Judge]

Originally Posted by Maguru

"I", in the here and now, am the product of a lifetime's experience or don't my experiences count? Whether I will be here when my humanity ceases to exist is anyone's guess.

I see it more as a person playing a video game. You're controlling the avatar (your ego) on the screen while. The problem is you actually think you're the avatar on screen, you can't see that you're the entity playing the game.

But it get's a little more complex, because not only are you the player and controller of the avatar on screen, you are also the creator of the entire game and system. You created the rules of the game (gravity/LoA. etc) but in order to fully experience the game in all it's glory, you have chosen to forget all of this.

Consciousness is the creator of the entire system and can and does change some of the rules along the way. Fundamental rules will always remain, but there are some that can be bent.

All the experiences are just all the different levels, as consciousness is perfect and cannot experience self concern, therefore now there is a way to experience self concern.........your human egoic life.

There is nothing wrong with having an ego, you can't experience life without it, but some people consider it's a crazy beast hell bent of self destruction and while that seems true sometimes, as consciousness you can always realign your ego to better serve your experience.

There really are no past experiences, because every experience is viewed in the now. Consciousness is a non time based being, so the creation of time is essential to experience.

Do your experiences count?

Yes, they are essential to the game/progam/reality, but it's best to view them as content, the content and form of your life, wonderful stuff, but not what you really are as they can't last, then they should be viewed in a non reactive state with ego validating them, not reacting to them.

Just my POV

Judge

[Maguru]

Originally Posted by Judge

I see it more as a person playing a video game. You're controlling the avatar (your ego) on the screen while. The problem is you actually think you're the avatar on screen, you can't see that you're the entity playing the game.

But it get's a little more complex, because not only are you the player and controller of the avatar on screen, you are also the creator of the entire game and system. You created the rules of the game (gravity/LoA. etc) but in order to fully experience the game in all it's glory, you have chosen to forget all of this.
Consciousness is the creator of the entire system and can and does change some of the rules along the way. Fundamental rules will always remain, but there are some that can be bent.

All the experiences are just all the different levels, as consciousness is perfect and cannot experience self concern, therefore now there is a way to experience self concern.........your human egoic life.

There is nothing wrong with having an ego, you can't experience life without it, but some people consider it's a crazy beast hell bent of self destruction and while that seems true sometimes, as consciousness you can always realign your ego to better serve your experience.

There really are no past experiences, because every experience is viewed in the now. Consciousness is a non time based being, so the creation of time is essential to experience.

Do your experiences count?

Yes, they are essential to the game/progam/reality, but it's best to view them as content, the content and form of your life, wonderful stuff, but not what you really are as they can't last, then they should be viewed in a non reactive state with ego validating them, not reacting to them.

Just my POV

Judge

How can concepts such as this "but in order to fully experience the game in all it's glory, you have chosen to forget all of this" ever be proved?

Your concept is based on assuming we are other than human beings at another level. All of which is conjecture and has not manifested in any way, shape or form and cannot be confirmed.

On the other hand, I have manifested into form, but not only. I cannot prove the formless aspects of myself but I experience them so I trust them to be true. Either my life experiences have created my formless self without awareness (up until now), or I have created my formless self from my experiences in awareness. Whichever one applies, I would not be me without my life experiences. Yes, they come and go but I am still here, for now.

We cannot look outside of ourselves for answers to who we are and the ego is no exception. We are one and the same and the concept is to merely bring awareness of whole self and not just the bits we like. I have experienced using ego in this way and it is a bit like getting slapped in the face with a wet fish.

[Judge]

Originally Posted by Maguru

How can concepts such as this "but in order to fully experience the game in all it's glory, you have chosen to forget all of this" ever be proved?

They can't, just like god, heaven, hell, eternal spirit, reincarnation, etc...none of it can be proved either way. You could beleive in something and I could beleive in the opposite and we both could be wrong.

I suppose it comes down to individual experience and what feels right for the individual

Your concept is based on assuming we are other than human beings at another level. All of which is conjecture and has not manifested in any way, shape or form and cannot be confirmed.

My concept is based on what I feel to be true, what I can prove to myself. I can't convince you of anything other than to prose my belief.

I always revery back to this.......what do I know for sure?..... and the answer is always that I seem to exist, everything else is up for debate

Judge

[Maguru]

Originally Posted by Judge

They can't, just like god, heaven, hell, eternal spirit, reincarnation, etc...none of it can be proved either way. You could beleive in something and I could beleive in the opposite and we both could be wrong.

I suppose it comes down to individual experience and what feels right for the individual



My concept is based on what I feel to be true, what I can prove to myself. I can't convince you of anything other than to prose my belief.

I always revery back to this.......what do I know for sure?..... and the answer is always that I seem to exist, everything else is up for debate

Judge

This is just what I've been saying all along.
All we know for sure is that we exist and the ego concept is to investigate this existence.

[yoopersmith]

Originally Posted by Maguru

I agree that I am a creation and also my thoughts and emotions are my creation. This is different to being a concept. My concept of ego is a concept in my mind. I cannot be a concept of my own mind.

"I", in the here and now, am the product of a lifetime's experience or don't my experiences count?

Whether I will be here when my humanity ceases to exist is anyone's guess.

I like this discussion...because people are discussing and not arguing...COOL!

Eckhart Tolle's conecpt of the ego (Pardon if I get it wrong, and feel free to correct me) goes something like this:

The real me...is consciousness. Not an idea or a concept, but just a sense of knowing that "YOU ARE".

He calls the "EGO" alot of different things such as: The voice in your head, Your FALSE sense of self, The YOU you think you are.

I like to think that the real me is consciousness which I like to think also as "spirit" or a soul...thoughts, past, concept, things...anything that is not consciousness are considered "Form" or "Forms"...

Problems arise when people identify with Form...be that the ego, stuff, your life story (or past life stories as well if you are into that kind of thing!).

I like to think that my "I-am-ness" or consciousness HAS forms...but I am not those things.

Consciousness requires nothing...and doesn't change, die, and always exists NOW.

...I could go on a bit...but I just wanted to add to the discussion...There is more about Eckhart Tolle on my web page...he's cool and Steve read and recommends two of his books.

[georgekk]

Originally Posted by Maguru

IMO the ego is a concept. It is useful in determining our inner (spiritual) workings that are difficult to describe. However, there have been many references to ego that infer the ego is like a separate entity inhabiting our bodies, eg. "because the ego is too proud to be put aside or managed" and "ego hates being in the present moment."
This in turn gives ego a mind of its own that is constantly at odds with self.

We only have one mind. It is all us. There is no separation. If ego thinks, we think. If ego feels, we feel. If ego believes, we believe. If ego is too proud then so are we. The ego is merely a reflection of self that we sometimes do not wish to see.

The concept of ego is to bring awareness of parts of self, e.g. behavioural patterns, thinking patterns etc.

Ego as a separate entity doesn't exist. It's just a concept to bring awareness of who we truly are being and not who we think we are being.

Without being too controversal, I believe that the ego is actually the real YOU.
This is defined in the latter day dictionaries as being 'self'
The mind is actually the soul, and the spirit is the part of man which belongs to God.

Hence spirit, soul and body as a Trinity.

The act of proudness is not really what the ego, is all about.

Main definition, being "The I Am"

We can devide this further into two catagories

1) Positive Ego
2) Negative Ego.

Without being egoistic, we die. Being proud, is not to be ashamed off, it merely means that we respect our inner self.

If we are not ego, then we shun the ego and communication is lost between overself and man.

One way of rejecting the ego, is to get fat, lazy and greedy. It can be said that this is food for the ego....but not so.

The ego is a proud part, not seen as a gluttonous part of us. It is something to be proud off, not shunned.

Value is ego, as without value we deterioate..and shun messages from the self.

That is my view.

George.

(Oh, by the way...Hello)

[Maguru]

Originally Posted by yoopersmith

I like this discussion...because people are discussing and not arguing...COOL!

Eckhart Tolle's conecpt of the ego (Pardon if I get it wrong, and feel free to correct me) goes something like this:

The real me...is consciousness. Not an idea or a concept, but just a sense of knowing that "YOU ARE".

He calls the "EGO" alot of different things such as: The voice in your head, Your FALSE sense of self, The YOU you think you are. I like to think that the real me is consciousness which I like to think also as "spirit" or a soul...thoughts, past, concept, things...anything that is not consciousness are considered "Form" or "Forms"...

Aren't we form with conscious awareness ?

Problems arise when people identify with Form...be that the ego, stuff, your life story (or past life stories as well if you are into that kind of thing!).

I like to think that my "I-am-ness" or consciousness HAS forms...but I am not those things.

Consciousness requires nothing...and doesn't change, die, and always exists NOW.

...I could go on a bit...but I just wanted to add to the discussion...There is more about Eckhart Tolle on my web page...he's cool and Steve read and recommends two of his books.

In Steves article "The War on Ego," he uses the concept of ego as a separate entity from the self. When he uses it on a personal level, E.G................

And when I do things to help people, it feeds my ego."

what does this really mean? I believe it makes him feel good about himself. It gives meaning and a sense of fulfilment in his life. The ego isn't literally being fed at all. Maybe the ego is being fed by showing humility through giving the ego a pat on the back, instead of hmself but that's another story.



Another quote from the "War on Ego" connected to my thoughts on Erkhart Tolle and his concept of ego.

The irony is that those who suggest we must dissociate from the ego are still very much ego-associated themselves. They simply detach their egos from materialism and re-attach it to spiritualism.

I think this is exactly what Tolle has done. He dis-associated from the physical ego (identity) and re-attached to a spiritual ego. So on this point I do not trust Tolle as a spiritual leader, but that's another story.

[Judge]

Originally Posted by Maguru

I think this is exactly what Tolle has done. He dis-associated from the physical ego (identity) and re-attached to a spiritual ego. So on this point I do not trust Tolle as a spiritual leader, but that's another story.

Tolle, Chopra, Steve, whoever, these people are not leaders or gurus, they speak volumes, but only a small part is important for you. They are not wrong or right, truth or misguided.

They present pieces of the puzzle.

No one voice gives you everything you seek. Why?

Because your ego loves this game of seperation.

You will never find one person who can complete the puzzle.

Even you own ego/avatar cannot do that.

Welcome to your life

[torilink]

Originally Posted by Maguru

I agree that I am a creation and also my thoughts and emotions are my creation. This is different to being a concept. My concept of ego is a concept in my mind. I cannot be a concept of my own mind.

"I", in the here and now, am the product of a lifetime's experience or don't my experiences count?

Whether I will be here when my humanity ceases to exist is anyone's guess.

the ego is the validation tool - the point of awareness/experience. I think what you are talking about is the identity that ego builds for itself, it is the illusion of separation, the illusion of a personality, a past, a history - a future, it is all coiled around that observation point. Ego believes that is what it is - that coil of experiences, but it isn't. It is in fact all those things we/ego believe we are which creates the program of reality we perceive.

[yoopersmith]

Originally Posted by Maguru

Aren't we form with conscious awareness ?


I think this is exactly what Tolle has done. He dis-associated from the physical ego (identity) and re-attached to a spiritual ego. So on this point I do not trust Tolle as a spiritual leader, but that's another story.

For the first question...NO. We ARE not form with conscious awareness. We are conscious awarness with an illusion of form. The Consciousness (or conscious awarness) is real and the form is the illusion.

For the 2nd comment. Ok. What you think is not my business. I disagree, but that doesn't really matter.

Tolle says that he doesn't have an ego...which I suppose might be true. I like to believe that his ego is now subordinate to his consciousness...the ego is no longer is charge...his consciousness is...

...I am working toward this goal as well...the ego is sneaky and mine likes craft beer, football, and other vices...they are falling away slowly...

Hope this makes sense...its a slippery topic to discuss.

[Maguru]

Originally Posted by torilink

the ego is the validation tool - the point of awareness/experience. I think what you are talking about is the identity that ego builds for itself, it is the illusion of separation, the illusion of a personality, a past, a history - a future, it is all coiled around that observation point. Ego believes that is what it is - that coil of experiences, but it isn't. It is in fact all those things we/ego believe we are which creates the program of reality we perceive.

Thankyou, Yes I am talking about the identity or the character that we inhabit or inhabits us. This is the 'self' I am referring to. The person we have become. I'm talking about who this character truly is and the influence it has on our perceived reality.

I believe a way or a tool to uncover/reveal the whole of the character is 'the concept of a separate ego'. When we refer to 'my ego', we are referring to a characteristic of our own. I think it's pretty simple in theory but putting it into practise is a lot more difficult but not impossible.

[Maguru]

Originally Posted by Judge

Tolle, Chopra, Steve, whoever, these people are not leaders or gurus, they speak volumes, but only a small part is important for you. They are not wrong or right, truth or misguided.

Maybe I should have said 'leading spiritual teachers'?

[Maguru]

[QUOTE=yoopersmith;277604]

For the first question...NO. We ARE not form with conscious awareness. We are conscious awarness with an illusion of form. The Consciousness (or conscious awarness) is real and the form is the illusion.

For the 2nd comment. Ok. What you think is not my business. I disagree, but that doesn't really matter.

I thought we were having a discussion?

Tolle says that he doesn't have an ego...which I suppose might be true. I like to believe that his ego is now subordinate to his consciousness...the ego is no longer is charge...his consciousness is...

ok. What you think is not my business. I disagree, but that doesn't really matter. Touche?

...I am working toward this goal as well...the ego is sneaky and mine likes craft beer, football, and other vices...they are falling away slowly...

Hope this makes sense...its a slippery topic to discuss.

Change can be difficult but worth it. I wish you well.

[Cantando]

Originally Posted by yoopersmith

Tolle says that he doesn't have an ego...which I suppose might be true. I like to believe that his ego is now subordinate to his consciousness...the ego is no longer is charge...his consciousness is...

...I am working toward this goal as well...the ego is sneaky and mine likes craft beer, football, and other vices...they are falling away slowly...

The 'ego' is an outdated term which psychiatry has used to try and define the self. I believe everyone adopts an ego, or rather, a self, by default and my definition may not match others, but I think the ego is our basic sense of self, our sense of ‘I-ness’.

Beyond that, it is difficult to describe. Sometimes, during meditation, I am aware of being the ‘silent witness’, just observing. But, I can’t keep that up all the time. As soon as I begin to interact with my mind/reality/others, I am being a ‘self’, which is the ego.

I agree with Maguru that this self is the human being, the person, and we can’t really separate ourselves from that. The self is the ego. It may be coloured/tinged with various emotions and beliefs, which come and go, but that self is basically who we are. I also believe that when we die, that basic sense of human self, of being a person, continues to exist. We are, and always will be, human beings. We don't morph into God or reincarnate as stick insects. We each have that unique quality of being a human being, a person.

When we talk about conquering the self or the ego, what we really mean is conquering the lower, negative aspects of the self which manifest as selfishness, greed, envy, etc, not destroying the actual self/ego.

And who or what is the ‘silent witness’ – God, the soul, pure consciousness? Perhaps, that is what we truly are. I don't know. But, in the meantime, I quite like being myself. I don't believe it is necessary, and perhaps it could even be spiritually detrimental, to try and crowbar the two apart.

Enjoy the unique gift of being spirit and self combined, as a person, as a human being.

[torilink]

I think that the self or ego as a point of reference, when it "Dies" ceases to be.

[Cantando]

Originally Posted by torilink

I think that the self or ego as a point of reference, when it "Dies" ceases to be.

The fact that one is conscious, or aware, means that one is in a state of beingness. That state of beingness is the true ‘self’. Being able to say ‘I am’, means you are ‘self’ aware. That is the primal self. From there, we may adopt viewpoints (temporary, illusory selves, if you like), or as you say, points of reference, which we may identify with to a greater or lesser degree.

Don’t you think Christ and the Buddha still exist and are still aware of who they are, and of their own selfhood, or do you think they have completely annihilated themselves?

[torilink]

no, I don't think there is any selfhood (identity) outside of self (ego). There is no self concern, no separation, no identity, likes or dislikes, nothing at all to differentiate your point of reference from mine, because in truth there is no such separation. The only things (for lack of better word) I believe will live on when my identity ends will be perhaps within consciousness as a whole. You can call that expansion, knowledge, energy or whatever but I do not believe it in any way will relate to some separated aspect of oneness.

my personal opinion is that this is why ego fears death so much.