EGO Vs NO-EGO
Ego Vs No-Ego
“Ego” is the sense of being, the I AM , self consciousness.
A Person…(peter…angryidiot aka gopi , danamolos aka…?, Tony etc etc ) are the “sense of being” – “this and that”.
“The sense of being this and that” also includes being happy, sad and so on so forth.
In other words I AM/EGO/ Self consciousness is also a sense of being- “being”- which is also, naturally, a sense of being this and that.
It is on this “sense of being this and that”, ..that the entire thought mechanism pivots around.
Thinking cannot take place without a sense of being.( or more truly a sense of being this and that).
This far this good. But why did man start to grapple with this EGO/ sense of being?
For a very good reason, it was because , his sense of being includes(ed) sense of being in pain and suffering , as sense of loss and a sense of grief so on and so forth.
Impermanent too is one such sense of being. I will be no more one day. I will not posses this and that one day …etc so on and so forth.
That led man to start wrestle with this sense of being. Question that sense of being.
In the Process, While the Vedas /Upanishads called this sense of being an incarnation/manifestation of the Divine, by exalting it as Brahman, atman etc etc some called this sense of being an illusion and the root to all suffering. For instance Buddha first explains that everything to be impermanent and then ,once, the bhikshu understands the doctrine of impermanency he puts forth a simple question….dear students, in this impermanent world of ours, which , you have understood , because of its nature of impermanency naturally and logically , leading to sorrow/loss and suffering , is it any way wise calling anything/something as me or mine?
No my lord the disciples reply….because a hammer hit them…..Bang ! no self , the anatta , No ego …like peeling open a fruit and putting it in ones hand and asking him to eat…as easy.
Now first let us come to the first route calling the ego …God, divine, Brahman, Atman, Jiva etc etc …..
Many many seekers when they come across a line which reads” aham brahmasmi”
“I am the Brahman”…get , content. There you go …the sense of being in this impermanent world of ours stands resolved. Let death/sorrow come , but this “I” carries on.
But very few question what the Brahman/Divine /atman /Self/ is in the first place!
And how do Vedas define Brahman?divine/self????? It is the source, it is beyond sorrow, it is permanent, it is like the centre of a wheel so on and so forth….
But all such definitions are always in the language of the sense of being.
Then suddenly there is a biting of the tongue, if it too is a sense of being…Am I free?
Out of the cupboard comes the limited nature of language/words…the Brahman is undefinable…not relative..is the absolute etc etc etc so and and so forth…
Na na na(not) or cha cha cha(also) cries the yajurveda
And the upanishads sophisticate the process and evolve the “neti neti” the not this …
But what ever “beyond” we try to project it too is only a sense of being…a sense of being beyond!
Now let us come to the second route …that ego is an illusion or in reality is not.
but how many of people who had this realisation of not being in real , stop eating?
It’s a very simple question, crude but to the point. Why ? why don’t they stop eating…?
2 answers come here…and any/all others are only built on these…
1. That only eating is happening and not someone eating it( some later Buddhist doctrines are in a way similar to this). So eating is real and someone eating it is an illusion.
However if eating can happen or is a happenning , why not being too?
2. That eating is also an illusion.
So if every thing is an illusion, why call it an illusion? It is real !. And on the other hand if there is something “real” other than this illusion it is back to the brhaman theory.
In reality one only needs to see with courage and in an instant it is seen that “life” every day runs contrary to the No-ego/No-self realisation…anyway..
So if both the routes do not resolve the sense of being….is there no resolution to the sense of being….? Where did the route(s) go wrong?
So the actual merry go round is not this world itself being a merry go round, but rather when these 2 routes go wrong.That is teh actual merry go round.
They went wrong by running away from it , in order to cope up with what they understood to be the root of all suffering.. as “the sense of being”.
Buddha makes a brilliant effort , to hold still the seeker from not running away from the sense of being and see the real real bond.
So he pulls away the seekr from the actual merry go round and simply says to him…
See dear seeker , it is not the sense of being which is the root, let me tell you…child…It is the craving for sense of being and non being that is the root of all suffering.
Bang then all hell breaks lose…where does craving end and love begin? Is eating ice cream and also other simple things in life also craving? If they are what the hell is life for in the first place etc etc etc.
That is why many people run away from Buddhism. Though it talks about kindness and metta it can "appear" real iron clad!
So the direction of Buddhism was correct…it was looking in the right direction..sense of being nothing wrong , it is something “linked” to this which is causing all the mischief.
So bang goes the seeker off the merry go round. He jumped of the spiritual number line as such…but as I said the link could not be determined by calling it craving.
It is Fear.
Fear is the bond that ties up man. A fear of being this and that. For instance I AM is a fear of Not being. I am Not is a fear of being.
One can say even fear is also a sense of being. True. But however sense of being is not our bond/root of the problem.
It is the fear of the past( of being so and so in the past) a fear of the present( of being so and so ) and a fear of the future ( of then being so and so ) that ties up man and the root of all suffering.
So enlightenment to the seeker is the ability to cope up with this “fear”.
If he says there is a reality beyond he is running away from this fear, if he says this is an illusion it is one and the same!
True fearlessness is when fear is taken head on! Not depending on any other thing, including not fearing the output.
Now one cannot teach/share… this head on or can one? Let me try…
>>>>>Okay let it come, if not today it will happen tomorrow. I am not running away from it.I will have to face it one day and I will face it so fearlessly, I will not be binded by fear, and die while living… .no way
Is how I take/think about death… ..
To get rid of this fear , head on is enlightenment. Because what is enlightenment ? it is the supreme ability , which is everyones inborn basic nature… in being able to cope up with no matter what! Past present future…for that is life!!