Yes we have talked about the ego before however I thought Dan Millman's account on the ego is truly remarkable and insightful.
This is from his blog, it's a little long but well worth the read! Enjoy :)
On the EgoSunday August 23rd 2009
The term ego — (along with superego, and id) were brought into public awareness by the late Dr. Sigmund Freud, neurologist and founder of psychoanalysis. However, according to a Wikipedia entry:
"The terms ‘id,’ ‘ego,’ and ’super-ego’ are not Freud’s own but are latinisations originating from his translator James Strachey. Freud himself wrote of ‘das Es,’ ‘das Ich,’ and ‘das Über-Ich’ — respectively, ‘the It,’ ‘the I,’ and the ‘Over-I’ (or ‘Upper-I’)."
It may be mere coincidence, but these original terms of Freud — The Id (It), the Ego (I) and the "Super-Ego" (Over-I) are remarkably similar to a more ancient Hawaiian (Huna) model that refers to the primitive Basic Self (Id or It), the Conscious Self (I) and Higher Self (Over-I or Upper-I). Whether or not Dr. Freud was exposed to or inspired by the earlier Huna teachings is mere conjecture.
Let it suffice here to note that the Ego was merely a helpful description or map (in the context of the Id and Super-Ego) of self-understanding. Pointing to the "I" (translated by James Strachey using the Latin "Ego") was a mere convention, not a pejorative (negative or desparaging) term.
I was simply I — one’s identity or sense of self. In psychology, the term "ego-strength" referred to a positive quality, a clear sense of oneself and one’s boundaries. And in some realistic spiritual traditions, it was recognize that one had to first develop a strong sense of self before one could transcend it.
Yet today, this term "ego" has become much maligned and obscured. The ego has come to mean this illusory sense of a separate self, also called (by philosopher Alan Watts) the "skin bag" with whch we define and limit ourselves. And enlightenment required the transcendence of this illusory ego, or "I."
This may in fact be true from a spiritual perspective, and many practices have been proposed by mystics, ascetics, and others, including self-denial, meditation (insight), tantric absorption, and so forth. But let us return to the specific topic of ego, and the confusion about it.
Today — especially in spiritual circles — if someone tells you that you have a "huge ego," this is not usually considered a complement. Vain, prideful, narcissistic and (seemingly) conceited people are said to be "full of ego" or to have big egos.
Most spiritual seekers aspire to "get rid of" or "let go" of the ego. When someone tells me this, I ask them, "Who is making that statement?" (Answer: It is the ego stating that it wishes to get rid of ego and rise to a higher state of spiritual achievement — the same drive as success-driven people everywhere, but in a seemingly "higher arena.")
According to Sufi philosophy, there are a small group of people in India known as masts (pronounced: musts) who do not seem to have an ego (or a sense of self) due to an "intoxication with God" and an inward focus. Most show no external desire, not even to eat, and must often be fed by others. In the west we might call them catagonic, but they are revered by some for being "egoless."
Again, according to a Wikipedia entry:
According to Meher Baba, a mast is one entranced or spellbound by internal spiritual experiences and ecstasies, who therefore cannot function outwardly in an ordinary way, and may appear mad to a casual outside observer. . . . Meher Baba distinguishes the mast state from madness, saying that in the case of the mad person mind is sped up, while in the case of the mast it is slowed down . . . Meher Baba contacted hundreds of masts all over India, Pakistan, and Iran, saying that he was freeing them from enchantment and helping them to continue on the spiritual path and to be of inward service to humanity.
Masts can be in varying degrees of the states of salik or majzoob. Salik means more in touch with outward surroundings — grounded and ordinary. Majzoob refers to that state of being immersed in the inner plane and divorced from the outside world."
I suggest that we are not here to get rid of the ego or sense of separate self; we are here to transcend it. We transcend the ego in two primary ways (and the first way can lead to the second): First, through insight — knowing ourselves to the bone, past self-imagery and illusion, seeing all our mechanisms, shadow side and tendencies. Second, through humor — not taking this self, this identity, so serioiusly, and transcending the need to defend the self. As noted, insight leads to humor.
There are various methods proposed in different traditions to achieve deep self-knowledge and authenticity, including dream-study and shadow-work, meditation (to grasp the nature of mind), naikan (a Japanese practice of looking inward), as well as tools for self-analysis such as the enneagram work, various psychological tests, astrological insights, and so forth.
One of the most useful and accessible tools to gain insight into the self is the Life Purpose System that I teach in (and my reason for writing) The Life You Were Born to Live. This is actually a form of "ego-reduction" because the more one sees one’s tendencies, the greater one’s sense of humor about this "self" and its mechanisms and tendencies.
We are here to recognize it as one functional part of a larger being, as an organizing principle of experience. Problems of fear and anxiety arise when we come to believe that this "I" or "ego" is all that we are, rather than a part.
According to the Hunas, when a new baby is born (and the soul descends or comes fully into the body with the first breath), that child already has a Basic Self from the moment of conception, and it has a Higher Self (Guardian Angel, Spiritual Guide) – but little or no ego (or sense of separate self) at birth. In other words, infants do not at first realize that they are separate from anything else. They abide for a brief time in mystery; nothing means anything.
The difference between an infant and a Zen master is that in the Zen master, the ego is transcended or seen through; in an infant, the ego is merely undeveloped.
However, soon, given the nature of our learning capacity, sense perceptions begin to make more sense, and repeated experience brings associations. Babies explore the physical body, and sources of nourishment and touch bring pleasure and comfort and warmth. Within days, weeks or months, the baby begins to become a someone.
This sense of self, along with fears, stress, and self-absorption, peaks for many in their teens and twenties (the "bullet-proof, know-it all" stage) until the more self-reflective thirties when life has begun to — well, kick some ass — and we cannot escape at least a few moments of actual insight into our human foibles.
There are those (teachers) who blame all bad things on this "ego" and advise letting go of it (as if that were possible). In ancient times we said, "The Devil made me do it." Now, in our spiritual sophistication, we say, "The Ego made me do it." The ego has become the universal spiritual scapegoat.
It is ironic that some teachers who speak of our pure essence and the ego who obstructs this purity of life and being, are non-dualists, who state that "Nirvana and Samsara are one" and posit no separation between flesh and spirit. Yet what could be more dualistic than proposing a "good" essence and "evil" ego (as the source of all troubles)?
In fact, the ego is not a thing, but rather a process or tendency to contract into this mis-perception of separation — to believe in its reality. Certainly there is this body and many other bodies; this is observable fact. But does the body itself experience separation from its envronment? Or is that a function of the mind and its perceptions? This is an important question to consider.
As I have explained in various seminars, we live in two worlds, each with its own truths – the conventional and transcendental worlds. Conventionally speaking, we are separate, individuated beings who are born, live and die. This is demonstrable truth — the body decomposes and the "soul" merely a concept or belief from the conventional view. From the transcendent view of those monks and avatars and other enlightened people, who we are (pure Awareness) is never born and never dies, and separation is illusion.
Meantime, if ego is indeed a process, moment to moment, let us recognize that ego is as ego does, and focus on how the body behaves.
I am not out to get rid of my ego. I use my ego, my identity, to learn, to teach and to serve. The "I," or Conscious Self, is here to learn, to absorb information, and to function as a person in the world.
Yet, as an ancient saying goes, "Where there is an other, fear arises." This sense of being a self, separate from and competing with others, does tend to engender fear, anxiety, and every sort of stress — not to mention the mortal dread of death.
When we realize that we are a leaf, but exist beyond the stem; we are also part of the entire tree, roots and earth — when we realize that we are not only the falling raindrop, but also the sea into which it falls — we transcend self-and-other, and expand beyond fear for this illusory personality-part of our larger being. Recognizing the self as a necessary part of the whole, we function well in the world, but hold to the vision of our larger Self.
On a physical, structural, biological and cosmic level, we recognize the Earth as a singular, living being floating in space, and ourselves as one of billions of cells on that body. From Earth we come, to Earth we return.
You are, like this Dan Millman character now typing these words, existing as naturally as a flower or sea shell, being what you are and doing what you do. For reasons both wonderful and mysterious, you have appeared here, out of mystery, and to mystery you return. Meanwhile, there are few truisms beyond the existential necessity to live your life as well as you can, with all its rising and falling, light and shadows — accepting and embracing these precious moments of human awareness.
The theater of life goes on, as does this egoic existence; then it changes, as do we all. Conventionally speaking, we are born, live, then die. The Basic Self goes on; the Higher Self continues; only the Conscious Self, this Ego, ends. It is like a disposable contact lens, fulfilling its purpose here this lifetime. This too is a natural part of the Way.
DAN'S BLOG
Wed Sep 09, 2009 7:08 pm