Spiritual Forums

Home


Donate!


Articles


CHAT!


Shop


 
Welcome to Spiritual Forums!.

We created this community for people from all backgrounds to discuss Spiritual, Paranormal, Metaphysical, Philosophical, Supernatural, and Esoteric subjects. From Astral Projection to Zen, all topics are welcome. We hope you enjoy your visits.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to most discussions and articles. By joining our free community you will be able to post messages, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos, and gain access to our Chat Rooms, Registration is fast, simple, and free, so please, join our community today! !

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, check our FAQs before contacting support. Please read our forum rules, since they are enforced by our volunteer staff. This will help you avoid any infractions and issues.

Go Back   Spiritual Forums > Most Anything > Philosophy & Theory

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 04-04-2016, 05:20 PM
OctoberSky OctoberSky is offline
Guide
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 643
  OctoberSky's Avatar
Well, I believe ego is defined differently depending on how someone sees it. I see it as just how we are, our personality, our sense of self, inner and outer confidence.. Our ego.. It's not bad to have a ego in my opinion and you cannot just get rid of it. But it's just about whether it is a healthy or unhealthy ego.
__________________
Magnetic eyes revealing my soul;
mysterious mind with secrets hidden,
psychic intuition makes me a wise predator
eyes ablaze with intensity,
a labyrinth of her deepest emotions.

Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-04-2016, 06:15 PM
r6r6 r6r6 is offline
Newbie ;)
Master
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 4,071
  r6r6's Avatar
Book1 Houston, We Have A Problem......

A few replies have gotten it correct. Ego is the I and we all have an ego. An I-verse, and that I-verse ego, in of itself is not a problem, or unhealthy.

When the I-verse becomes a problem, and that can occur to various degrees-- ex narcissm{ Trump? } --then others may make comments regarding anothers ego being a problem and leading to unhealthy circumstances of existence, or communication, or whatever.

Where I come into contact with ego being most problematic, here at SF, is when the I-verse{ ego } blocks others from truths--- and many times obvious truths ---which truths are derived from our observations and rational, logical common sense deductions thereof.

When the ego creates mental blockages to truth, then it is time for this communication....'uhh, Houston( NASA ), we have a problem'..... imho

r6
__________________
"Dare to be naive"... R. B. Fuller

"My education has been of my biggest impediments to my learning"...A. Einstein

"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool."...R Feynman
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-04-2016, 06:21 PM
Uma Uma is offline
Master
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,944
  Uma's Avatar
A Buddhist I met once said there are three kinds of attachment:
I like
I don't like
I don't care

That's what ego does, attaches "I" to something.
The more attachments, the more obfuscated it gets




p.s. (I always wanted to use the word obfuscated )
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 05-04-2016, 09:19 AM
Gem Gem is online now
Master
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 22,073
  Gem's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by waechter418
…..after all ego (Latin: I) is just a viewpoint, a reference term – which might irritate, when overly used - but so does “you know”
“Egoists, Egocentrics & Egomaniacs” stem probably from the need to project and label something beyond the I – at least it would explain why ego is supposed to be synonymous for self. But what is self? – certainly not I, otherwise psychologists, mystics & gurus couldn’t make so much ado about it.
To me the term self encompasses what I am – including my ignorance about it – which doesn’t bother me, since I am what I do & I do what I am – thus having no problem with my self, and no desire to be someone else, or to go to a monastery to get rid of my self – which in my opinion requires an ego much larger than I can afford.

Most theorists think of ego in two ways 1) it is socially constructed; and hence 2) It is developmental across the lifespan.

There's different angles, but Freud is the central figure. He defines the ego as the socially constructed psyche. This regulates primal impulses so that we might have 'appropriate' behaviour in society. This implies that without ego there can be no culture.

Egoists is a different concept - it pertains to self-serving and vanity.

The question of self is central to philosophy in both the West and East, but perhaps more predominant in the East. The teaching tradition of Ramana deals with this exclusively, and his contemporaries, Nisargadatta, Papaji, Gangaji, Mooji continue to promote Ramana's notion of 'self inquiry' in various ways. It's worth a look. In Western philosophy it goes back to before Aristotle in the ancients and a large number of philosophers have attempted articulations since (David Hume had a good crack at it). I think Daniel Dennett's essay, The Self as a Center of Narrative Gravity, makes a very neat composite of Western self. Short and easy to read, too.
__________________
Radiate boundless love towards the entire world ~ Buddha
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 03-05-2016, 12:18 PM
Within Silence Within Silence is offline
Experiencer
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 420
  Within Silence's Avatar
One can't rid it's self of that which in reality doesn't exist.

The desire to rid oneself of its ego serves to reinforce it, who is getting rid of what?

One who states they've rid them self of the ego; is it proud of this illusion? And who/what is it that knows when their ego dies?-"Their" =duality how many of you is there?

The problem is language i.e. my ego, my mind, my consciousness, my self, my life etc. Where is this "my" that is separate from ego, mind, consciousness, self, life?

You don't have life, you are life.
You don't have consciousness, you are consciousness.
You don't have self, you are Self.
The dualistic part of "my" having/possessing is what the word ego points too, when duality is seen through then Ones sees that it was an illusion which played its role perfectly in the grand drama.


Just as the desire to be saved is in itself selfish, so is the desire to rid oneself of the ego, as this, desire is ego; desiring/wanting/needing/longing/begging- to rid itself of itself is it not?

See/observe/look whence desire arises from, that's all that's needed.

Shall the sun use the light of the moon to find the source of light?
Shall the mind use the mind to rid itself of the mind?

There is not a feeler of feelings, there is feeling.
There is not a seer of sight, there is sight.
There is not a hearer of hearing, there is hearing.
There is not a taster of tastes, there is taste.
There is not an awareness of awareness, there is awareness.
There is not a noticer of noticing, there is noticing.

Now, once "neti neti" is apperceived, "its" finished, One is..........now go joyfully (full of joy) and play your part in the grand game of life.

The above is of course how I perceive it, and I may in fact be mistaken, but who could know absolutely? LOL
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 03-05-2016, 01:13 PM
naturesflow naturesflow is offline
Master
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: In my cocoon.
Posts: 6,653
  naturesflow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uma
A Buddhist I met once said there are three kinds of attachment:
I like
I don't like
I don't care

That's what ego does, attaches "I" to something.
The more attachments, the more obfuscated it gets




p.s. (I always wanted to use the word obfuscated )


Don't get attached to your new found word will you..

I think what you say makes more sense to me, because I see that attachments can be problematic.
__________________
“God’s one and only voice are Silence.” ~ Herman Melville

Man has learned how to challenge both Nature and art to become the incitements to vice! His very cups he has delighted to engrave with libidinous subjects, and he takes pleasure in drinking from vessels of obscene form! Pliny the Elder
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 06-05-2016, 04:35 PM
Within Silence Within Silence is offline
Experiencer
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 420
  Within Silence's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by naturesflow
Don't get attached to your new found word will you..

I think what you say makes more sense to me, because I see that attachments can be problematic.


I read once that Buddha suffered form the desire to be without desire, and the desire to not suffer.

I wonder if one could suffer from attachment to the desire to not be attached?

What if we just accept unconditionally whatever the moment brings without any restrictions, conditions or limitations? Would that end suffering?

In other words, if you're attached so be it, if you're suffering so be it, if you're not so be it, if you desire then so be it and so on. It seems that the non-acceptance or resistance to the way life actually is could be the main cause of suffering.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 07-05-2016, 02:15 AM
Gem Gem is online now
Master
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 22,073
  Gem's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Within Silence
One can't rid it's self of that which in reality doesn't exist.

Yes. It's more a case of recognising the imaginary.

Quote:
The desire to rid oneself of its ego serves to reinforce it, who is getting rid of what?

That's a good question.

Quote:
One who states they've rid them self of the ego; is it proud of this illusion? And who/what is it that knows when their ego dies?-"Their" =duality how many of you is there?

The problem is language i.e. my ego, my mind, my consciousness, my self, my life etc. Where is this "my" that is separate from ego, mind, consciousness, self, life?

You don't have life, you are life.
You don't have consciousness, you are consciousness.
You don't have self, you are Self.
The dualistic part of "my" having/possessing is what the word ego points too, when duality is seen through then Ones sees that it was an illusion which played its role perfectly in the grand drama.

Good point, who is the owner of 'my' ego?

Quote:
Just as the desire to be saved is in itself selfish, so is the desire to rid oneself of the ego, as this, desire is ego; desiring/wanting/needing/longing/begging- to rid itself of itself is it not?

Sure, ego and that desire are the same thing, basically.

Quote:
See/observe/look whence desire arises from, that's all that's needed.

Shall the sun use the light of the moon to find the source of light?
Shall the mind use the mind to rid itself of the mind?

There is not a feeler of feelings, there is feeling.
There is not a seer of sight, there is sight.
There is not a hearer of hearing, there is hearing.
There is not a taster of tastes, there is taste.
There is not an awareness of awareness, there is awareness.
There is not a noticer of noticing, there is noticing.

Now, once "neti neti" is apperceived, "its" finished, One is..........now go joyfully (full of joy) and play your part in the grand game of life.

The above is of course how I perceive it, and I may in fact be mistaken, but who could know absolutely? LOL

Good post.
__________________
Radiate boundless love towards the entire world ~ Buddha
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 07-05-2016, 02:20 AM
Gem Gem is online now
Master
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 22,073
  Gem's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Within Silence
I read once that Buddha suffered form the desire to be without desire, and the desire to not suffer.

I wonder if one could suffer from attachment to the desire to not be attached?

What if we just accept unconditionally whatever the moment brings without any restrictions, conditions or limitations? Would that end suffering?

In other words, if you're attached so be it, if you're suffering so be it, if you're not so be it, if you desire then so be it and so on. It seems that the non-acceptance or resistance to the way life actually is could be the main cause of suffering.

Well, it's a subtle and complex thing really, but I agree with this principle. It reminds me of a cool Puppetji clip.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXX6KMOt4q4
__________________
Radiate boundless love towards the entire world ~ Buddha
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 07-05-2016, 02:48 AM
Within Silence Within Silence is offline
Experiencer
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 420
  Within Silence's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gem
Well, it's a subtle and complex thing really, but I agree with this principle. It reminds me of a cool Puppetji clip.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXX6KMOt4q4


Thanks for sharing the video. Wise words from Puppetji!

Subtle is the key word, I think its seemingly complex, but in actuality its so simple that it's almost impossible to see. In other words, seeing what is is really not difficult or complex, what's complex is the dropping of all the conditioned thoughts preventing the seeing. I think the most difficult part is the discipline required to quiet the monkey mind in order to allow the "seeing" or awareness to happen.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c) Spiritual Forums