|
|
| Do we as human beings require ego to function? Someone recently told me it is impossible to go beyond ego and exist as a human being in this day and age?
I would love to hear some thoughts on this matter.
thankyou
|
|
| |
|
| According to patanjali and yogic philosophy our consciuosness has three componants, ego (ahamakar) is one of them. If the ego is healthy then it seves us by by identifying with the enviroment so that we can differentiate men from women, food, water etc, we need it to maintain biological and mental clarity (imagine the world with everyone high on mushrooms, how would they function, ?? there would be chaos)
However what we do need to realise is that the ego is only a very small part of us, and it can take over and make us believe we are our ego, and this is when we become attatched to materail things, possessions, labels etc,
It has been compred to a light bulb declaring "I am the electrical current" and then go on to descibe electricity as a pear shaped glass object.
Yoga practice is concerned with cutting the ego down to size, this is done with the another part of consciousness - intelligence (buddhi)
Wereabouts in england are you from? 
Edited by raquel 2007-08-26 6:40 AM
|
|
| |
|
| Dear Raquel:
Where did you get these 'ego-istic (NOT egotistic!) ideas/explanations' from?
raquel - 2007-08-26 6:22 AM
According to patanjali and yogic philosophy our consciuosness has three componants, ego (ahamakar ) is one of them. If the ego is healthy then it seves us by by identifying with the enviroment so that we can differentiate men from women, food, water etc, we need it to maintain biological and mental clarity (imagine the world with everyone high on mushrooms, how would they function, ?? there would be chaos )
However what we do need to realise is that the ego is only a very small part of us, and it can take over and make us believe we are our ego, and this is when we become attatched to materail things, possessions, labels etc,
It has been compred to a light bulb declaring "I am the electrical current" and then go on to descibe electricity as a pear shaped glass object.
Yoga practice is concerned with cutting the ego down to size, this is done with the another part of consciousness - intelligence (buddhi )
Wereabouts in england are you from? |
|
| |
|
| Yes, ego is MUST to function in the world. When one goes beyond ego, one is not in the world, one is realized. After realization, when one comes back in the world, one again has ego. But, the difference in the previous ego and the new ego is: Previous Ego id Identification whereas the new Ego is a Tool to serve others.
planthelper - 2007-08-26 5:54 AM
Do we as human beings require ego to function? Someone recently told me it is impossible to go beyond ego and exist as a human being in this day and age?
I would love to hear some thoughts on this matter.
thankyou
|
|
| |
|
| hy Kulkarn,, I have picked this understanding up through teachers and books. Isherwoods translation and Iyengars light on life, is my understanding wrong? |
|
| |
|
| the Ego must be present but it must be transformed. |
|
| |
|
| Has anyone here transformed their ego yet? I am on the right road but i have a long treck ahead, im sure  |
|
| |
|
| That sort of transformation is a process rather than a destination.
One moment of not watching the Ego, one moment of rooting in the believe it is" handled" and up it rises. |
|
| |
|
| neel said it best. and as paul wrote: be in the world, but not of it. |
|
| |
|
| In terms of relation to Sutras, it is not correct. But, as a useful material, it is great.
raquel - 2007-08-26 8:44 AM
hy Kulkarn,, I have picked this understanding up through teachers and books. Isherwoods translation and Iyengars light on life, is my understanding wrong? |
|
| |
|
| Dear kulkarn which part is not in line with sutras, im learning all the time and want to clarify basic teachings, im sure its alifetimes work (maybe many)  |
|
| |
|
| Is the definition of ego in yoga same as the definition in webster dictionary? If not, what is the definition? It seems that the idea/issue of ego comes up a lot in different philosophies, but it always confuses me. |
|
| |
|
| According to patanjali and yogic philosophy our consciuosness has three componants, ego (ahamakar) is one of them.
===> This is correct. But, it is not stated like this by the sage Patanjali.
If the ego is healthy then it seves us by by identifying with the enviroment so that we can differentiate men from women, food, water etc, we need it to maintain biological and mental clarity (imagine the world with everyone high on mushrooms, how would they function, ?? there would be chaos)
===> This is totally out of line of the sage Patanjali.
However what we do need to realise is that the ego is only a very small part of us, and it can take over and make us believe we are our ego, and this is when we become attatched to materail things, possessions, labels etc,
===> Out of line xxxx
It has been compred to a light bulb declaring "I am the electrical current" and then go on to descibe electricity as a pear shaped glass object.
===> There is no electric current or bulb in the Sage Patanjali Sutras.
Yoga practice is concerned with cutting the ego down to size, this is done with the another part of consciousness - intelligence (buddhi)
===> The sage Patanjli never says that ego should be cut down to the size.
raquel
Dear kulkarn which part is not in line with sutras, im learning all the time and want to clarify basic teachings, im sure its alifetimes work (maybe many ) |
|
| |
|
| Ah good point tabula, i failed to point out the definition into context in relation to my question.
By ego i mean ones image of ones self, the part that we see as separate from the rest of existence, the "i think this", "i am right" or the "I am that" if you get the drift.
I believe that it is very possible to go beyond the state of mind of "I" and exist easily in this day and age, it is not a essential requirement to function in today's world, though few are actually doing it. I feels this is largely a result of conditioning and could be easily overcome if the way we condition human beings was changed from the egocentric ideals we instill in today's society.
I would even go as far as saying that true freedom or power you might say is found when we go beyond the "I". Once there is no image there is nothing to identify with, therefore leaving nothing to be harmed or charmed as you see your true self is part of everything. Once you have reached this state nothing can insult you, incite you or upset you. I believe this is an important aspect of yoga, that is reaching a state of "no reaction" which in turn brings true peace to you and in turn the world.
|
|
| |
|
| hy Kulkarn now I am totally confused because most of the stuff I wrote and understand is from Isherwoods translation and commentary, and Iyengar both of them use the anology of ego declaring its self as electric to describe the ego declaring itself as our true self.
Iyengar himself states that Patyanjali says we should cut the ego down to size with intelligence!! Have you got his book light on life? He gives his own translation and understanding of the sutras, but it seema like it is not like yours and his are different
These are Iyengars quotes
"since each biological entity is subtly or grossly different, and recognises that in its self, so
needs to recognize differences in othwers. At the most basic level, sexual reproduction demands we differentiate between male and female. Our "I-ness" is an identifier"
"When I identify myself with my possessions and attributes, it is amahkara. From this derives- me, my, mine"
"much of yoga practice and ethic is concerned with cutting the ego down to size and removing the veil of unknowing that obscures its vision. This can only be done with the intervention and the assistance of the third constituent of consciuosness - intelligence (buddhi)
So are we saying that we can function without it or is it a neccassary part of our being? I was on the understanding that we had to develop healthy ego, not letting it rule the psyche, is this wrong?
Plant helper - I see what you are saying, the world has become very materialistic and its thrown in our face with advertising, media etc everyday, its as if everyone is being subtly brainwashed and has spiritual amnesia.
How close are you to dropping the ego?
Edited by raquel 2007-08-27 1:57 AM
|
|
| |
|
| To even say "I have dropped the ego" or " I am nearly there" is still rooted in ego.
There is no "I" anything other would be separation. This is the only way to explain it.
Edited by planthelper 2007-08-27 2:19 AM
|
|
| |
|
| so we would need ego to comminicate with others, how else could we live in the real world? Ok I can see that monks could do it, maybe retired people but being a mother, wife and having an occuopation, I have to carry out certain roles. My feeling is that we have to recognise the difference between soul and role. It would be very difficult for me to live my life without playing my part as a mother, wife etc
Planthelper wereabouts in England are you from? |
|
| |
|
| Adyashanti on ego
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxWZc1cRLnA
be in peace,
Soul |
|
| |
|
| Raquel wrote
Planthelper wereabouts in England are you from?
Mongolia is not a part of the British empire.
Edited by planthelper 2007-08-27 7:27 AM
|
|
| |
|
| Dear Raquel: 1. No additional comments except what I already wrote earlier, on the quotes and references you made. 2. It is impossible to function in the world without ego. It is possible to function without egotism, but not without ego. When you are not functioning in the world, no ego is necessary. This state has two aspects: a) Samaadhi state which is still. This is achieved by Yogis. b) turiya state which is beyond all the other states. This is achieved by Saints who are beyond Yogis. They look like they live in the world like ordinary men, but they belong to another plane.
raquel - 2007-08-27 1:49 AM
So are we saying that we can function without it or is it a neccassary part of our being? I was on the understanding that we had to develop healthy ego, not letting it rule the psyche, is this wrong?
|
|
| |
|
| Plant helper, its obvious that you are from England or educated there,. so stop trying to pull the wool over everyones eyes, your whole character is very dry and very british just because you live in Mongalia doesnt mean you are from there I live in Cyprus but im not cypriot.
You called the Americans Yanks which is an english term for our cousins and you write English far too precise (much better than me) to have just picked it up off your so called English wife.
Bet your from the South |
|
| |
Is Ego essential to function?
