How to practically force your ego to die?

[davidsun]

Originally Posted by Lucid

I see the ego as a costume for the infinite to masquerade and simply because I perceive it correctly to be unreal does not mean that I am condemning it as negative or useless.

Regarding and labeling it as a 'fraud' is negative, i.e. anti-Life (in my view). Hence my saying that you didn't get my point. What you are in effect saying is that you think in creating the world 'the infinite' has chosen to create unreality - implication being that 'the infinite' is a deliberate defrauder.

[Lucid]

Originally Posted by davidsun

Regarding and labeling it as a 'fraud' is negative, i.e. anti-Life (in my view)...

When I used the word fraud, I was using it to describe the nature of the ego in terms of it's presentation to the world. I'm not implying that the ego is negative or anti-life and there isn't any such falsely perceived judgement attached to my words as they are written.

By calling it a fraud I am saying that the ego isn't real but presents itself as if it is. This is fraudulent whether the ego is healthy and beneficial or detrimental and destructive.

[davidsun]

[quote=Lucid]When I used the word fraud, I was using it to describe the nature of the ego in terms of it's presentation to the world. I'm not implying that the ego is negative or anti-life and there isn't any such falsely perceived judgement attached to my words as they are written.
Izatso?

Originally Posted by Lucid

By calling it a fraud I am saying that the ego isn't real but presents itself as if it is. This is fraudulent whether the ego is healthy and beneficial or detrimental and destructive.

The ego is a real, practically useful invention of higher forms of Life, and it can be healthy, meaning positively functional in relation to others and Life Itself. when used appropriately, IMO (that it often isn't - that humans are, in many case, foolish and make unwholesome choices in no way invalidates this fact - my observation and experience is that it is a fact, that is).

In my view, your characterization of it is blatantly/unjustifiably/inappropriately/unacceptably pejorative.

[inavalan]

Originally Posted by davidsun

...
The ego is a real, practically useful invention of higher forms of Life, and it can be healthy, meaning positively functional in relation to others and Life Itself. ...

I believe / know to be so, too. But you can't / shouldn't argue with faith. Just present your truth dispassionately, and / or indicate your path to it, and you did the most you could do.

Honest, good people will bring in support of their beliefs scriptures, gurus, number of years, number of people, ... all fallible; there are no absolutes.

[inavalan]

Originally Posted by KonrD111

How can you kill your ego to be happy in life and unveil the truth by stopping your mind? Some creative ideas please.

If you kill your ego, then who are you, here, alive? If this isn't against your faith, I suggest as a better solution that you open and establish a good communication path between your conscious (your ego) and your subconscious.

[Lucid]

[quote=davidsun]

Originally Posted by Lucid

When I used the word fraud, I was using it to describe the nature of the ego in terms of it's presentation to the world. I'm not implying that the ego is negative or anti-life and there isn't any such falsely perceived judgement attached to my words as they are written.
Izatso?


The ego is a real, practically useful invention of higher forms of Life, and it can be healthy, meaning positively functional in relation to others and Life Itself. when used appropriately, IMO (that it often isn't - that humans are, in many case, foolish and make unwholesome choices in no way invalidates this fact - my observation and experience is that it is a fact, that is).

In my view, your characterization of it is blatantly/unjustifiably/inappropriately/unacceptably pejorative.

Yes that is so.

I have been describing something which you have not experienced, that being my experience of my ego. Again we have an error in communication, when I use the word real I am not saying that the ego doesn't exist on any level (obviously it does and I've already acknowledged that) but rather that it is not permanent and so it is illusionary to my understanding.

I have not argued against the ego potentially being healthy or positive and in fact have stated I feel it can be healthy and positive so why continuously act as if I have condemned the ego when I have done no such thing outside of your own perception of my words which I cannot be responsible for?

Are you just stubborn? Is it that you refuse to acknowledge experience outside of your own or do just enjoy poking holes in your own imagination?

[davidsun]

[quote=Lucid]

Originally Posted by davidsun

Yes that is so.

I have been describing something which you have not experienced, that being my experience of my ego. Again we have an error in communication, when I use the word real I am not saying that the ego doesn't exist on any level (obviously it does and I've already acknowledged that) but rather that it is not permanent and so it is illusionary to my understanding.

I have not argued against the ego potentially being healthy or positive and in fact have stated I feel it can be healthy and positive so why continuously act as if I have condemned the ego when I have done no such thing outside of your own perception of my words which I cannot be responsible for?

Are you just stubborn? Is it that you refuse to acknowledge experience outside of your own or do just enjoy poking holes in your own imagination?

I am just responding to what you say using the words you have choosen which I think are seriously negatively 'loaded'.

For example: when you say the 'ego' "is not permanent and so it is illusionary". I think that you are relegating any and all 'happenings' - personally experienced and expressed earthly Life and Love included - to insignificance (their only 'true' 'significance' being that they are fake or false, in your estimation that is). If someone gives me a
'hug' that is not an 'illusionary' expression and experience just because it is 'temporary', unless they did so under false pretenses that is,and even then such hypocrisy is indicative of the real condition of their soul which is a real living thang (IMO).

The only explanation I have for your positionality and attitudinality in relation to me is that your (still unrelating/unrelated?) 'ego' must be getting in the way of your meaningfully relating to what I think and so say in relation to what you think and so say.

P.S. Yes, I am 'stubborn' in the sense that I often doggedly refuse to 'silently' go along with what I consider to be false attributions and thereby implicitly ratify them by staying 'silent'.

[Lucid]

[quote=davidsun]

Originally Posted by Lucid

...which I think are seriously negatively 'loaded'.

Yes, you think your understanding of my words is negative.

[davidsun]

[quote=Lucid]

Originally Posted by davidsun

Yes, you think your understanding of my words is negative.

Yes, I think/understand your words to be negatively 'loaded', for the reasons I have attempted to communicate.

[Lucid]

[quote=davidsun]

Originally Posted by Lucid

Yes, I think/understand your words to be negatively 'loaded', for the reasons I have attempted to communicate.

Ok, now we are getting somewhere. You feel my words are negatively loaded for reasons and I've told you that they are not negative or negatively loaded on my end. It is your choice and position in life to hold judgements and attachments to various aspects of life and that is fine if that is what you want but seeing as this is the Non Duality board, this disposition may raise some issues but that is also fine.

Now with the understanding that the negative attachment is occurring on your end we can move forward. I am not relegating Earthly experience to the insignificant, rather I no longer feel very much attachment to Earthly experience and this has allowed for more love, kindness and compassion from me rather than less as I am not judging each moment or hanging on to temporary expressions as if they were necessary to sustain the infinite.

This doesn't mean in the slightest that if and when someone expresses love to me that I disregard their expression as meaningless but rather I embrace it for what it is and if called for I attempt to convey in return my appreciation for them.

In a non dualistic frame of mind where love is everywhere and in all things, pointing it out is as unnecessary as it is for a blade of grass in a field to point out that it is surrounded by grass. It is simply the environment, simply the way it is and so if someone were to hug you in this frame of mind there would be no break in terms of experience from what you were feeling, perceiving, experiencing before, during or after the hug as the drop doesn't feel separate from the ocean.

If you remember when I spoke of my near ego death experience, I said that I was too afraid to walk through the door completely because I (the ego) was afraid of death and that is the truth of it. However, though I didn't go all the way I went far enough to realize that my personal, individual identity is not real in the permanent sense and so I could no longer take it and it's drama's seriously.

I don't have any negative feelings towards my ego, I accept it for what it is and often laugh at it throughout the day. But not a scornful laughter, more like a sincere "aww isn't he cute" kind of way similar in the way a parent watches their child. As my ego stumbles to try and make sense of it's illusions, the witness is along for the ride.

It is in my opinion perfectly fine if people want to identify with their egos but for me that time has passed and I choose to identify with the infinite, the eternal nothing and everything. As I said however because I was too afraid to go into full on ego death, I've come to a situation that makes for a hilarious show and I believe for me it worked out perfectly for where I am. Somewhere in the middle, observing.