wonderful guest

[Guest guest]

Amanda wrote:

 

Let me explain:

>Despite the apparent taboo on this list to use

>everyday linguistic terms as I and You and They

>and Others, I shall proceed by using those terms

>to make my point clear.

>

>I understand the concept of non duality and also

>how a Bodhisattva, through enlightenment, will

>view the problems I presented of sacrifice and

>the concept of others in my mail as less than

>irrelevant. I tried to indicate that in the post

>by saying that I was aware of my ego drivenness

>and lack of non dualism.

>

>My post was intended as a sharing of

>personal thoughts

>and views to Deborah, it was not intended as

>arguments for or against anything.

>

>I however, again in my state if ego drivenness,

>perceived John's post as mildly patronizing,

>teaching from above to below, as showing off

>if you will.

>Piquing questions and trying to provoke reactions

>in others with the probably good intention of

>teaching a lesson or two.

>

>Why ?

>

>Because if you are fully non dual and possess

>full insight into the situation of others,

>then you should be aware of the doubts and fears

>that cause others not to see your point and

>hence it would be irrelevant to try and correct

>them by posing a series of questions to them.

>

>In addition, a fully enlightened, egoless

>being in my view does not feel the need to

>teach others, because that is a result of ego,

>but will instead leave them to gain their own

>insights on their own terms. Hence, piquing

>questions has no point, listening

>with compassion has.

>

>That was my point.

>

>In all egodrivenness.

>

>Best regards,

>

>Amanda.

>

 

Dear Amanda,

 

Welcome to the list. I thought about you last night and fervently wished

"someone more expert" would reply to all these ego issues you raised. I like

your forthright honesty and your willingingness to break apparent taboos to ask

tough questions, and to question authority. Your self-awareness and questioning

are the foundation of self-inquiry. Ego vs. egolessness is an interesting

duality to look at. I have learned there is a bit of difference in what is meant

by ego in western thought from eastern concepts, so perhaps the experts here can

explain that difference for us all.

 

What I want to share is just some observations from a western psychological

understanding, where the ego is mostly defined as a defense mechanism for one's

self-identity. (Lets leave Freud out of this one.) In this way of looking at

ego, you are no more responsible for "having an ego" than say for having a

pancreas. And just as the pancreas reacts to too much sugar, the ego will react

to any perceived threat to self. (Yet its not a "thing" like the pancreas which

can be removed once and for all, its more an interface with the environment

outside self.) And I'm sure you have noticed how the ego relaxes when sensing

safety, acceptance, and love are present. Trying to get rid of ego reactions is

so hard because that alone makes one notice it more, like trying to focus on

stopping hate in order to have more love. It puts one's attention on the

negative polarity of dualities. What makes ego fade away..or awareness of ego

drop off..is more often to focus on something else.

 

My best guess about the apparent lack of ego in realized persons and other

"saintly" beings, is that they are so busy Being love and truth, that what is

going on around them in the environment is not only less of a threat to that

identity but is practically irrelevant to them as they are not so focused on

getting whatever from their environment so much as what they radiate out to it.

Somewhat paradoxically, this frees up energy for a tremendous sensitivity and

awareness of others, but it is a "non-reactive" sensitivity. At least I have

been fortunate enough to observe this quality in others, and I think they still

had enough 'ego' self-preservation instinct left to dodge a speeding car. The

"highly-reactive" sort of sensitivity is usually the result of self being

wounded by others when very vulnerable. Is that what you meant by "the doubts

and fears that cause others not to see your point"?? Cause a person in a fearful

state is understandably more focused on self than others. And the kind of

self-sacrifice that results mostly from the motivation of following some moral

imperative of shoulds usually results in resentment or false pride. Hey, I speak

from experience here..not from a throne of judgement. I think your questions

about influence of ego deserve some more discussion, because how that may happen

is important.

 

Anyway, I am getting less interested in definitions of what is enlightenment and

more interested by discussions of the process or how-to's, if you know what I

mean. It ends up being just another label to put on some one, based on what

they do or something. Defining expectations of what an enlightened person would

or would not do is kinda slippery, too. It can be surprising and unique, rather

than predictable, or simply difficult for others to understand...yet sometimes

it is unmistakably recognizable.

 

Hoping some others will shed more light on this,

 

Gloria Lee