Killing One's Ego...

by FMZ 37 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • FMZ
    FMZ

    Sunny... I'm not completely sure, but someone has told me Earth before..

    New Light, you are very right... in fact, it isn't very hard to get it back... human nature by default is egotistical, so to get it back, all we have to do is not "quell the ego". I hear some even do it by accident.. heh.

    Megs, true. Ego = selfish, no ego = selfless. The ego is useful to us for many things, not the least being self preservation. Touching on Gumby's reply (), reducing one's ego doesn't mean letting it all go. That would actually be rather selfish and wouldn't go far to self preservation, as it would be hard to get a job, etc. to support oneself, and people would be upset by the strange smell coming from the bendy green dude. Self preservation is necessary to us so that we can learn more and do more good in the world.

    FMZ

  • frankiespeakin
    frankiespeakin

    Heres a good site with lot of info about Jungian psychology:http://www.cgjungpage.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=526&Itemid=40

    The Meaning of Individuation PDF | Print | E-mail
    Written by C.G. Jung
    Page 1 of 3

    The chapters in this volume were originally written as lectures given at the Eranos Meeting at Ascona, Switzerland. A number of scholars from different fields of knowledge meet there annually to discuss certain topics of human interest. My contributions represent the psychological aspect of the problems under discussion, and turn upon a question of peculiar interest-the-so-called process of individuation.

    The chapters in this volume were originally written as lectures given at the Eranos Meeting at Ascona, Switzerland. A number of scholars from different fields of knowledge meet there annually to discuss certain topics of human interest. My contributions represent the psychological aspect of the problems under discussion, and turn upon a question of peculiar interest-the-so-called process of individuation.

    {viewonly=public}


    Jung Page members can read full-text articles. Please consider becoming a member today. {/viewonly}
    {viewonly=registered,special}

    I will try to explain the term "individuation" as simply as possible. By it I mean the psychological process that makes of a human being an "individual"-a unique, indivisible unit or "whole man." In the past, it has been generally assumed that consciousness-or the sum total of representations, ideas, emotions, perceptions, and other mental contents which the ego acknowledges-is equal to the psychological "whole" of an individual. But nowadays the rapidly increasing knowledge of phenomena that can be explained only on the hypothesis of unconscious mental processes has made us doubt whether the ego and its contents are really identical with the "whole." If unconscious processes exist at all, they must surely belong to the totality of the individual, even though they form no part of the conscious ego. If they were a part of the ego, they would be conscious, because anything directly connected with the ego is conscious; consciousness is by definition the relationship between the ego and the various mental contents. So-called unconscious phenomena are those that have no connection with the ego. For this reason the ego usually denies their existence, and yet they reveal themselves in an individual's behaviour. A careful observer can easily see evidence of them, although the individual himself is blissfully unaware of the fact that he is exhibiting his most secret thoughts, or even something he has never consciously thought. Only prejudice could lead anyone to suppose that, because he has never entertained a certain thought, it cannot be a content of his psyche. This might be the case if, as I said before, the psychic totality were identical with consciousness. But there is plenty of evidence to show that consciousness is far from covering the whole of the psyche. Many things happen semi-consciously, and an incalculable number of occurrences may even be entirely unconscious. The careful investigation of dual-or multiple-personality, of dissociation in nervous and mental diseases, and of approximately similar phenomena in normal people has yielded a wealth of data. I cannot imagine how one would set about explaining such phenomena without the hypothesis of the unconscious, a concept which acknowledges the fact that things live and function in the psyche just as if they were conscious and while the ego is unaware of their existence. For further information on this point the reader may wish to consult the works of Pierre Janet, Theodore Flournoy, Sigmund Freud, Morton Prince, and others.

    At all events, medical psychology has been profoundly impressed with the number and importance of the unconscious processes that give rise to functional symptoms and even organic disturbances. These facts have undermined the view that the ego expresses the psychic totality. It has become obvious that the "whole" must needs include, besides consciousness, the field of unconscious events, and must constitute a sum total embracing both. The ego, once the monarch of this totality, is dethroned. It remains merely the centre of consciousness.

    We may well ask whether the unconscious part of the psyche itself has a centre or not. I should hardly dare to assume that there is such a thing in the unconscious as a ruling principle analogous to the ego. Actually, everything points to the contrary. If there were such a centre, we should expect almost regular signs of its existence-for instance, intentional and purposeful opposition. Cases of dual personality would be frequent occurrences, and not rare curiosities.

    Unconscious phenomena usually appear chaotic and unsystematic. For instance, reams-one of the most frequent manifestations of the unconscious-show no apparent order, nor any tendency to systematization such as might be expected from a personal entity endowed with consciousness of itself.

    Neither the philosophers nor the more modern explorers of the unconscious have ventured to assume the existence of an unconscious equivalent to the conscious ego. On the contrary, such philosophers as C. G. Carus and Eduard von Hartmann treat the unconscious as a cosmic principle, something like a universal mind without any trace of personality or of ego-consciousness. Modern scientists regard the unconscious as a psychic function below the threshold of consciousness, too feeble and too dim to be perceived

  • JamesThomas
    JamesThomas

    The "ego" is a mental construct. An identity weaved from the fabric of beliefs, concepts, memories, emotions, interpretations, etc.. It is a transitory identity dependent upon external events and time. It is a very limited and contracted identity imprisoned within the tiny capsule of the body/mind. Since it is a false self, it lacks wholeness, and sensing this haunting vacancy seeks to full-fill itself via a plethora of ways: drugs, sex, money, fame, religion, rape, murder and war...the list goes on.

    It does not need to be rebuked, killed or subdued in any way. It just needs to be seen and accepted for what it is, and it automatically loses it's power to rule. It is useful in a practical day to day existence. It helps to know when someone is calling out your name, whether it is your true Self, or not.

    When what is false is clearly seen, what remains is True.

    The true-Self is dependent on nothing; and is boundless. The true-Self, the silent and intimate conscious-awareness which reads this now, only believes itself to be the ego-matrix. If it really wants to, it can see it's true Self. Earnestness and sincerity are the keys; not "killing" or forcing.


    j

  • Incense_and_Peppermints
    Incense_and_Peppermints
    If I didn't have my ego, my hair would be to my ass and my jock itch would be waaaaaaay outta control.

  • LittleToe
    LittleToe

    IMHO, when focus is not on self (and I specifically mean "ego"), elevating anything becomes unnecessary.

    As for those passages of scripture, I guess you'd need to be in that place of examining what a corrupt little vermin "ego" can be, to put them in the context they were intended. The alternative IS egotistical (through reverse-psychology) and I suspect that wasn't the aim...

  • Noumenon
    Noumenon

    I don't really believe there is any such thing as the 'ego'.

    There is really only the Will. Jesus killed his on Will (ego) by refusing to do what his own will wanted and becoming subservient to the creator's will. The will is a natural God given thing inside us to make us work, create, do things, the atavistic force inside us that motivates us to get out of bed in the morning and get on with living. The will is what causes us to act on the even deeper feelings of love we feel. If there was no will there would only be a feeling that would never be acted on.

    Frederick Nietzsche picked up on this, however, he only proffered a perverted version of the power of the will. The Will can be our master or our servant. Those who allow their 'will to power' to consume them fall victim to the sins of pride, greed, conquest, envy, dominance, etc etc. There is no love in Nietzsche's version of the Will. Those who harness and direct their 'will to power' towards purposes that are motivated by love use their 'ego' towards good purposes.

  • LittleToe
    LittleToe

    I prefer the phrase "submitting the ego".

  • poppers
    poppers

    JamesThomas has already given you a good foundation as to what ego is. Here is a post I wrote about ego on another site; perhaps it will flesh out your understanding a bit more:

    Quoting you quoting me, 'When you said" Having a 'mission' implies a separate entity who would seek to fulfill that mission - that separate entity does not exist. There are no shoulds and shouldn'ts except within the realm of the ego-bound. " '

    'I don't get this part. Please help me understand.'

    Ego is the one who would set before itself a 'mission' that needs to be discovered and accomplished, and so it sets forth in search of that mission. A large part of this sort of thinking comes from family upbringing, educational institutions, religious dogma, and what society says.

    It will do all sorts of things in the name of finding and completing its perceived mission: fulfillment through relationships, good works, occupation, seeking power of over others, acquisition of wealth, and other sorts of things 'of the world'. When these things fail to bring happiness then it is common for the ego to seek out something within the spiritual realm, and it will chase after various esoteric practices: meditation, chanting, raising the kundalini, astral projection, pranayama, hatha yoga - you name it and ego will think the answer lies there.

    All of these practices (and all other practices) are believed by the ego to hold the answer, to be the key in finding happiness, reaching enlightenment, or at least in fulfilling some sort of mission. Years and years (and in some cases decades and lifetimes) are spent in their pursuit in the hopes that some day enlightenment will be gained, happiness will be found, or a life mission completed. The fallacy in all of this is something ego does not want to hear: ego is a phantam, it does not exist in reality.

    Ego is simply a conglomeration of thought one has which gives that person a sense of identity, and which separates it from all others; all other people as well as things in the phenomenal world. Ego is maintained by the repitition of its story - the Story of Me.

    It is nothing more than thought, and You (the real You) cannot be thought. Thought comes and goes, yet there is still a sense of beingness/existence when thought is not arising, is there not? Simply notice this for yourself. You must be that which is always here, and what is always here is awareness. Even when ego abates awareness remains, and awareness is what you actually are.

    Ego can be thought of as a dream character. When you dream at night all of the characters seem very real and separate from 'you'. Yet, when you wake up you realize that it was all simply a dream, an illusion that arose out of yourself. There were no separate characters because all of those characters, things, and events within the nighttime dream came out of your own consciousness - it was all one, and that oneness arose out of consciousness; no separation whatsoever.

    Similarly, our daytime idea of who we are arises out of awareness; it isn't actually real, it is only thought and thought constantly changes. But it is this thought that seems to separate you from everything else. As soon as thought creates an identity called 'me' it automatically creates 'other'. This separation is not real, only apparent. Were it not for thought there would be no separation.

    It is only in this ficticious separation that ideas arise which ego clings to or resists. Among these ideas are created 'missions' for the ego to seek out and fulfill. If ego did not arise no such 'mission' could be created. Without the ego there is no separation, only oneness. You are that in which all else arises - pure awareness. Everything you perceive is a manifestation of awareness/You - no separation at all.

    Perceived separation is the foundation of all fears, which only arise from egoic thinking. Ego's driving force is fear: fear of failure/success, fear of how others think of you, fear of physical death/harm, fear of 'other', and the black diamond of all fears - the fear that it does not exist. But when searched for the ego can't be found, only awareness. How can you be something which when searched for cannot be found?

    Ask yourself, 'Who am I', or better yet 'What am I?' and actually investigate and see if you can find an answer to this outside of awareness itself. This question redirects awareness onto itself and reveals that what you really are is eternal and unchanging awareness, and out of that awareness all else arises. Because of that awareness ideas of self may arise, but those ideas are always changing. Can you 'be' something that changes? Only an ego will adjust its ideas of self based on new or discarded information. Yet, even when it does so there will be an underlying sense of nonchange beneath those ideas which it holds. That nonchanging something is what you are, but because it doesn't change it get overlooked by the ego/mind. Ego/mind is usually directed on 'outside' events, but when awareness is turned inward awareness itself is revealed.

    At some point all thought will cease, yet there will still be a sense of 'knowingness' without an object to be known. This knowingness is awareness itself, and that's what you really are. Then you will realize that ideas of separation are just that - ideas. Ideas which ego uses to keep itself separate from everything else, and which keep you bound in delusion.

    So, in reality, separation does not exist; and if there is no separation then there can be no fear.

    I hope this clarifies things a bit for you.

    \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

    Here is a followup post to this:


    All you have are questions now - this is good, because now you can question all of your assumptions, which most people never do. The most basic assumption you or anybody has is that you, as a separate entity, exist apart from everything and everyone else. Since this is 'your' life then the first and only question that needs to be asked is, 'Who am I?' Who is this 'me' that everything seems to be happening to? You have assumed for most of your life that you have existed, but do you really? Investigate directly and see for yourself. Is there a separate entity or only an idea of a separate entity which arises out of awareness?

    How to be happy? By living life from the natural state of awareness rather than identifying with the ego. The natural state is one of fulfillment and happiness - there is nothing that needs to be added or taken away for happiness and fulfillment. The ego thinks that by accumulating more knowledge, power, possessions, special abilities, performing good works, and so forth that happiness will be the result.

    The irony is that literally nothing 'needs' to be done because happiness/peace/contentment/fulfillment are yours by nature; it's just that they are obscured by ego identification. Tolle calls it the noisy mind, but it's not so much the noise as the identification with that noise. When ego identification is severed the natural state is automatically revealed, and then it is seen (by no one) that nothing needs to be done. The noisy mind will quiet on its own when there is no more identification with it. This is what happened to Tolle during that pivotal night - there was a sudden disidentification with ego. For most people the disidentification is gradual.

    Tolle's portals are ways of directing attention away from ego and onto awareness itself. It's not that ego is the enemy and needs to be destroyed, it's just that ego gets in the way of consciously seeing one's true nature. Ego will fight for its life when it feels threatened and it will employ every trick it can think of to remain in control. This is where it can become very subtle in its attempts to stay in charge. For example: it will hear about enlightenment and so it will pursue it eagerly - enlightenment becomes a goal, a mission to be fulfilled, and all sorts of practices will ensue - meditation seems to be chief among them. But this is a trap because the very performance of any sort of practice or technique will keep ego engaged. In other words, ego is trying to get rid of itself (for that is what enlightenment is, egoless awareness), which is impossible! A 'spiritualized ego' is the greatest barrier to enlightenment.

    It is ego which gets caught up in thinking (which it doesn't 'do' - thoughts simply arise out of awareness on their own and then are identified with by the ego) and the storyline it has created for itself. It is this seemingly endless identification which is the cause of unhappiness and suffering.

    In truth you are already enlightened but you don't realize it yet. With the discovery that you aren't ego/mind by directly seeing this truth enlightenment is automatically revealed, and thus, there is a resting in the natural state, whose nature is that of stillness, happiness, peace, and fulfillment. Once ego identification is broken the egoic structure begins to crumble and the natural state becomes consciously experienced for greater and greater lengths of 'time'. Then, when thoughts and ego arise again (as they will) they are no longer believed in as being true and so they lose their ability to sway you one way or the other.

    Tolle's words are helpful pointers to this natural state. I would especially recommend listening to Stillness Speaks because he draws you into this natural state of awareness (I would recommend doing this while at home at first, so there are no distractions to draw your attention away). There is nothing you HAVE to do to get there, however, but listening to him can spontaneously lead you back to Your Self as pure awareness. Once you recognize (re-cognize) what it is you will see how simple it all is and it will become easier to return there/here. Then you will laugh at yourself and all of the 'gymnastics' that you previously used to get something that you already had!

    This is all a great joke, a great play that consciousness is putting on for itself. There is nobody here! There is nobody doing anything! Pure consciousness is doing everything! You are now waking up and getting the punchline of this joke. By the way, this doesn't make you better than anyone else (that would be egoic thinking), it just wakes you up to what it is you really are.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit