|
|
| upon further review of some of my favorite books i've come across some rather good explanations to help me with my understanding, so here goes
ego--self identifying with material--illusion
soul--self identifying with infinite
Self/Atman/Brahman
Who tastes
Who smells
Who feels
Who hears
Who thinks
Not the body, but the self perceives all of these things
what? i'm making progress here, alright?
if i've made some error in judgement please correct it, Thank you in advance.
|
|
| |
|
| SCThornley - 2006-07-19 10:12 AM
ego--self identifying with material--illusion
soul--self identifying with infinite
Self/Atman/Brahman
Who tastes
Who smells
Who feels
Who hears
Who thinks
Not the body, but the self perceives all of these things
Dear SCT,
I think you are considering : Self = Atman = Brahman; right ?
If that is true, then your inference is not correct. Self is the Knower & the Knowledge - the infinite conciousness. Taste, Smell, Feel, hearing sound & thoughts are related with your sense organs & the mind. All These are within body. There are different instruments by which "you" percieve :
i) Sense Organs - Lowest level
ii) Mind - Next higher level
iii) Intellect ( The power of descrimination ) - Much higher level
iv) Atman/Self - The highest level
The perception of the same thing will vary depending upon what instrument you use. The mind can control the sense organs. The intellect can control mind & the self can control all. Once the self awakens, the perception changes completely - It is not the same what you percieve by your sense organs or mind or Intellect.
Self is Pure, omnipotent, infinite conciouness. However, till the layer of ignorance is removed we keep on enjoying foolishly through our sense organs & the mind. Your instrument of enjoyment determines at what level you are. The self doesn't need anything to enjoy because it always enjoys eternal bliss which is far superior.  |
|
| |
|
| Is it the self that is receiving the data that all the organs and the mind and intellect are transmitting?
Behind all of these tools, isn't the self that weilds them?
Edited by SCThornley 2006-07-20 8:45 AM
|
|
| |
|
| Yes, self is the master. However, due to ignorance/illusion which binds self, there is an illusion of ego - the sense of "I". This "I" appears to drive everything & percieves joy or pain. This "I" looks real till the dirt of ignorance is there over the self. All the joys & pains are percieved & all the actions are done by the sense organs, other body organs & the mind. Combination of all these, creates a false sense of "I". This cover of ego/"I" remains even after death, even in heaven/hell. The cover of ego breaks only on liberation & then self becomes free of cycle of life & death.
Is it the self that is receiving the data that all the organs and the mind and intellect are transmitting?
This all is recieved by "I" only. Self doesn't get involved. When Self realisation comes, Self starts "seeing" actions being performed by sense organs & mind in "Witnessing state". |
|
| |
|
| okey dokee
|
|
| |
|
| I'm having trouble with ego. Okay, ego is the part of us that identifies with the material. I imagine this means while we're here it's a nessesary part of our life as human. The problem I see is being able to see past your ego. Is this right? So I'm thinking ego gets a bad rap because society is using the term interchangably with egotism. Also, my hero had a large ego which I think gave him the confidence to accomplish things he was told just weren't possible. Therefore I would think his ego served him well. I wouldn't say he was an egotist, because he wasn't arrogant, or boastful. He respected people, and connected well with people. He was confident in his abilities. I say his ego was large because on occation something unrelated to him would happen, and he would think it was about him. I figured that was a small price to pay when you weigh it against the benefits his ego brought him. This is like taking things personally, right? Which we all do, at least sometime during our lives. Sometimes even when we know better. I constantly have to remind myself that most often another person's reaction has nothing to do with me. It's mostly about how the other person has been conditioned to respond due to their own life situations. I could be the action that causes the reaction, but I didn't create the reaction. I don't want to view my ego as the bad guy, but as a part of life on earth. If I truly had no ego would I even know what to do here? Could I even make simple choices? Would I have a personality? I think I need one while I'm here. Is my logic wrong? |
|
| |
|
| My dear friend, there is nothing good or bad as such in absolute sense. You must have heard somewhere - "A garbage is actually a thing in the wrong place". Ego ... if it is not there, how will you know yourself ? If ego is not there, I am as good as a stone.
The ego helps you survive. Ego helps you learn & grow. Ego helps you achieve higher things in life.
However, the "ego" attaches you to this world. In fact, the "ego" what we are talking here is slightly subtler. The feeling of "I" is ego - the sense that you are different from others is ego - the sense that you have an identity is ego. Because of this ego, we think "I do"/"I enjoy"/ "I give" etc. There is nothing good or bad about it. If you want liberation - you have to drop this ego. You have a choice to make. |
|
| |
|
| Thank you devotee, but I have more questions. Okay, so you drop your ego on the path to liberation. Liberated people still have to survive though, so when they step out into the real world, they pick their ego back up? Are they still liberated? I'm confused, or no wait, my ego is confused. |
|
| |
|
| A good question, I must say !
See, once you are able to achieve the state which is "ego-less" ( without "I") even for a while, the world around you changes. Now, when you go back to the real world, you are a changed person to some extent ( this extent will vary widely depending upon many things). You start seeing things with a different perspective. Your journey starts with that. Then you keep on practising & achieve higher & longer periods of "ego-less" state (like samadhi). Finally, when all attachments are gone & all Karmas are gone, you are liberated.
Now when you come back to the original world & "pick up your ego" ( you will never pick it up like an ordinary person, if you are really liberated), will you still remain liberated ? Lord Krishna says in Gita : Once you "attain Knowledge" (aka, are liberated), your Karmas become seedless. Nothing attaches you. The good karmas or the bad karmas - they bear no fruit. You are like an Ocean in which all rivers of Karma flow in but they no longer disturb the everlasting peace of the great Ocean. Rules of Karmas /ego/"I" etc. apply on the ordinary people - they don't apply on the enlightened one.
P.S. : I don't consider myself an authority on this subject. My reply is based on my understanding of the Gita, Upanishads, Advait, Buddha's teachings & teachings of various other masters on this issue. Thanks for discussing this issue.  |
|
| |
|
| these are good issues to discuss
but i still wonder if it is better to bear good fruit, instead of no fruit at all? |
|
| |
|
| Choice is yours ! |
|
| |
|
| Okay devotee, as you say, you're no expert, I will say I'm truly ignorant. I know some terminology, and some theory, but understanding is coming one millimeter at a time. This nonattachment theme, is that the Buddist ideal of nonattachment? As a mother, really I have a hard time with this. I think how nice for them that they can feel this way, but in my physical reality, I just don't see it as possible. Maybe I have something wrong in my thinking, but my love for my children is a real bond, I can't even see it as undesirable even if it ends up hurting in the long run. Also, in one book I read, one part of the definition on Samadhi was feeling a connection to all things. I'll warn you, and say I have a problem with language, but to me connection and attachment are very similar words. So, thanks again for helping me out here. |
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 8442
    
| BQ - non-attachment is not the same as not caring and certainly not the same as non-loving. I find this is a VERY difficult subject when we get to the mother/child connection. My own understanding of this came from working with other people's kids both before and after having my own. Pre-motherhood, I had deep emotional connections with the kids I worked with. When they cried, i felt their pain, and had that deep, aching need to ease their own pain so I could ease my own. Once I had my own and felt that heart connection with them, I was able to step back from the kids I worked with and, although I love them, I no longer carry an emotional burden around them. I can look at one of my toddlers who has fallen down and unemotionally assess the situation - whether they are really hurt or just crying for attention. I respond just as quickly as I did before (maybe more quickly, since I don't have to calm my own reaction first) if there is a real injury, but don't have that sense that I am hurting as much as they might be.
And mother-to-mother here, this is a good thing to cultivate as your girls move into the stage of bringing boyfriends home. Good to be able to suspend judgement when they are, shall we say, less than we are hoping for and also for letting go when they break up with the one you might think is "THE ONE." I still miss some of my kid's ex's  |
|
| |
|
| devotee - 2006-07-23 8:35 AM
Choice is yours !
fruitless action?
that causes no pain
but it is still action |
|
| |
|
| so, how to act without creating fruit
because no matter how sweet the fruit once it is gone, you want more--therein lies the pain of good fruit |
|
| |
|
| bstqltmkr - 2006-07-23 8:57 AM
This nonattachment theme, is that the Buddist ideal of nonattachment? As a mother, really I have a hard time with this. I think how nice for them that they can feel this way, but in my physical reality, I just don't see it as possible. Maybe I have something wrong in my thinking, but my love for my children is a real bond, I can't even see it as undesirable even if it ends up hurting in the long run. Also, in one book I read, one part of the definition on Samadhi was feeling a connection to all things. I'll warn you, and say I have a problem with language, but to me connection and attachment are very similar words.
Non-attachment is normally a highly misunderstood concept. Non-attachment doesn't mean that you don't love. Love binds you not because you "love". It binds you because you love because you think it is "yours". Your children are lovable just because they are there & you happen to be there as well. Why do you think, you should love them only because they are "yours". Think of it - are they really "yours"? Is it necessary to label them as "MINE" as a precondition for "loving" ?
Samadhi is the highest stage in Meditation. Achieving this stage depends upon how pure you are & also your practice. You may keep on meditating for life & yet not get into this mode. Some people are born pure - like, Sri Ramkrishna - he entered into Samadhi just by watching beauty of Nature at an early age. Patanjali describes it a state of eternal bliss. You become the Knowledge & the Knower --- there is nothing else to know.
Edited by devotee 2006-07-23 9:12 PM
|
|
| |
|
| SCThornley - 2006-07-23 3:50 PM
fruitless action?
that causes no pain
but it is still action
so, how to act without creating fruit
because no matter how sweet the fruit once it is gone, you want more--therein lies the pain of good fruit.
"because no matter how sweet the fruit once it is gone, you want more--therein lies the pain of good fruit" - That is the real wisdom, SCT. You got it !
Desires bind me. The feeling of "MY" binds me. When my actions are free from desires ( for me ) & the feeling of "MY" - the actions won't bind me. If I give & feel that ""I" am giving" - I am bound. If I give & feel that "I am doing a good work & God will reward me" - I am bound. By doing a good work with that feeling I will certainly be rewarded ( by God / Nature) but that binds me also for sure. |
|
| |
|
| As usual, I'm struggling with words here. I'll try to clarify what I feel when I say my kids. My body was instrumental in bringing them into this reality, and so they are my responsibility. It's my duty to guide and care for them until that day when they can do for themselves. I love them, and I like to think its unconditional. I can't imagine anything they could do would ever stop the love flowing from my heart for them. I certainly don't imagine that I own them, they are their own person. I don't think there was any precondition, they were here, and they were "mine", and I love them. It was all at the same time.
Thanks for saying non-attachment is highly misunderstood, it makes me feel a little less hard headed.
My personal goal in meditation is to achieve some peace of mind, open my heart, and accept any knowlegde that shows itself. I guess that's a good thing, if samadhi depends on purity. Both sound like beautiful theories, not likely to become my reality any time soon. Oh well, I've made progress, and hope to continue progressing. That's the best I can do for now. |
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 8442
| BQ - I am not sure moms like you and I are 100% ready for non-attachment to our children Perhaps we have them to help us learn some of the lessons around attachment? As long as I live I think I will have that deep, gut wrenching (in a good way) feeling of emotional attachment to them. I can be pretty subjective about them sometimes, but bottom line is that motherhod thing. |
|
| |
|
| tourist - 2006-07-24 12:44 PM
BQ - I am not sure moms like you and I are 100% ready for non-attachment to our children Perhaps we have them to help us learn some of the lessons around attachment? As long as I live I think I will have that deep, gut wrenching (in a good way ) feeling of emotional attachment to them. I can be pretty subjective about them sometimes, but bottom line is that motherhod thing.
The pain of attachment to offspring is paramount, for Dad as well. |
|
| |
|
| An illustration of attachment, some never get over the lost of their love one, and reduced to tears upon the thought of the lost, or filled with guilt. It is like the mind wants to continue to glue to the past, fixed in great sadness, which leads to sufferings. If one practices non-attachment, allowing the past to pass, one can free the mind and the soul (including the deceased), and be able to lead a happier life. Letting go is easier said than done, but not to let go is for certain to generate an undesirable outcome in our lives. I think it is human’s responsibilities, and a gift to one to enjoy a loving parent-child relationship, there is no attachment in question. Unless one yearns for more and better relationship, and without which one is miserable, then that is attachment that need to be worked on. This is what I read about surrendering: By ready to surrender them (our attachments) at the appropriate time, our consciousness becomes like a pure crystal that allows the light of our authentic Self, the atman, to shine through brilliantly without distortion. Would appreciate input so I can learn more, and hopeful, see the light. Namaste |
|
| |
|
| ystan - 2006-07-24 3:58 PM
An illustration of attachment, some never get over the lost of their love one, and reduced to tears upon the thought of the lost, or filled with guilt. It is like the mind wants to continue to glue to the past, fixed in great sadness, which leads to sufferings. If one practices non-attachment, allowing the past to pass, one can free the mind and the soul (including the deceased), and be able to lead a happier life. Letting go is easier said than done, but not to let go is for certain to generate an undesirable outcome in our lives. I think it is human’s responsibilities, and a gift to one to enjoy a loving parent-child relationship, there is no attachment in question. Unless one yearns for more and better relationship, and without which one is miserable, then that is attachment that need to be worked on. This is what I read about surrendering: By ready to surrender them (our attachments) at the appropriate time, our consciousness becomes like a pure crystal that allows the light of our authentic Self, the atman, to shine through brilliantly without distortion. Would appreciate input so I can learn more, and hopeful, see the light. Namaste
this weekend I met a fella who lost his son
this caused him great pain, but said that his Yoga practice helped keep him sane and helped get him over the life destroying event.
I totally relate to this good man, for I have four children and a wife and live my life as if they will always be there.
He invited me to come and be a part of his 'community' and i took him up on it.
I only bring this up because I believe rain falls on everyones house and dark days happen for all of us, eventually, and sometimes we all hit the bottom, it just depends on how prepared you are for the hit, so will you bounce or break?
Edited by SCThornley 2006-07-24 4:05 PM
|
|
| |
|
| I only bring this up because I believe rain falls on everyones house and dark days happen for all of us, eventually, and sometimes we all hit the bottom, it just depends on how prepared you are for the hit, so will you bounce or break?
I totally agree with you, we must be prepared for the hit, and bounce back as quickly as possible, because we will never now when will the next hit be, life is unpredictable. By being attached we will make a bad situation worse, e.g. unable to focus, or ruin our health. It is our birthright to live a fulfilling and happy life, no matter what life dishes out to us. Namaste
Edited by ystan 2006-07-24 4:21 PM
|
|
| |
|
| Namaste |
|
| |
|
| Non-attachment to the past I can certainly understand, and also non-attachment to the future. Not that I'm against preparing for the future, but you never really know, and so it's better to be flexible. Here in the present though, I'm totally attached to my family. Okay, I probably do have a few other attachments to work on, but I'm not afraid of work. I try not to be greedy, I can recognize that I have everything I need for a good comfortable life and am thankful. So any idea on other areas in life where I might need to examine my attachments? Don't worry about throwing in ideas in general where someone's attachments could cause unnecessary suffering, I'm looking for ideas and not taking it personal. |
|
| |
Ego Self vocab
