LifeandDeath

I think Ego is a complex beast to define and touch on as so many people define it in very different ways. I see it as similar to our sensory perception. In one hand, we need it to view the world, however on the other hand, we become so attached to our sense that we can think that is 'all' there is. When really, any sensory perception is a subjective projection created by our own mind, and its only a limited perspective re-created symbol to us as a reflection of reality. So, we rely on our senses for survival, to navigate around etc. But we can get so enchanted by senses that they delude us into a false separation out of the present moment and into our own arrogant introverted perspective of the object. It can also cause additional separation as our nervous system and sensory organs are designed for conditional response and so we add layers through repeated experience on objects in perception, getting lost and entangled in our own additional layers of meaning on to of objects themselves. Ego is very similar to sensory perception. Its a eddy in a river of reality that is self-serving, self-referential, and about self-survival at all costs. On one hand we need it to ensure we apply relevant knowledge frameworks in place for us to live in the conventional world, however, we get lost in it if we don't understand the bigger picture. If we can't see it as only self-serving properties, we get lost in it's primordial power, and we identify with it. It can cause us to then cling to, or avoid, our egoic agenda and then lead to delusion. This is such a deep rooted powerful construct we have created, that we actually can't see out of it, unless we apply a lot of concentration and force (or a life circumstance gives us an existential crisis) to break free of our subjective point of ego centricity. So I believe, ego is in the process of our sensory perception and the way we are hard wired in our bodies to function. I believe we can never drop ego all together, as it's a self created illusionary construct anyhow, so doesn't exist to drop in the first place! However, it's the clinging to and avoidance that then turns us into selfish creatures, and then we will then protect this egoic agenda to the grave if we have to, overriding anything that confronts the validity of our egoic agenda. This belief that our self centeredness and ownership over things is "real" and we then place our selves (and extensions of ourselves - i.e. others/family and objects) and our beliefs as priority, which is then what directly gets in the way of seeing other people's point of view, and being selfless or accepting, sharing, forgiving, kind, generous, etc. Our ego will go to the extent and create a belief that we own our thoughts, feelings, body, life, objects, and even then create a fictitious internal private world we assume is ours too. We think this self-serving behaviour and the creation of 'self' is normal, and in some cases it's encouraged and embedded in our social structure. But I see the delusion of ego and it's creation of self as true evil as it stands in the way of love and Absolute Truth.

There's no right or wrong time frames. I've was doing 1 hour a day, then dropped to 1/2 hour per day. I've been meditating for 15 months now. I think I get just as much out of 30 mins as I do 60 mins. Although I didn't do 60 mins so perhaps I could be further down my path if I did... but I'm not going to go down that road of analysis! ha ha Here's some pointers I've picked up from reading different stuff, mostly Daniel Ingram's book, Mastering Core Teachings of Buddha: Free link here: http://static.squarespace.com/static/5037f52d84ae1e87f694cfda/t/5055915f84aedaeee9181119/1347785055665/ A good present mindful 1 minute is better than an unpresent unmindful 10 days - so basically if you have 30mins you can really get powerful results - if you have longer then better It is also true that if you do longer meditation in one go than you can achieve quicker and deeper results - depending on what you are intending to get out of meditation Retreats like @Tancrede Pouyat said are good to get some real momentum - i.e. getting over certain blocks to your practice. Daniel Ingram mentioned it's like pushing a bolder over a hill. So if you had an option of either 1 hour every day for 6 months, or half an hour every day and 1 week retreat, he would choose the retreat. He explained it like, a daily meditation is a small push of the bolder up the hill. Possible to get it over, but he would rather spend a week with one big push to get the bolder over the hill then his daily pushes will take him to the next hill. The hill is a metaphor for any emotional/mental blocks or resistance. Basically, work with what works for you, and the truth is some people only need 15 mins a day, where others need 2 hours. There will be varied results depending on the individual, intention and quality of focus and approach in meditation. I hope this helps

*meant to say above "we shouldn't cling to it" sorry

I'm going to reply to my own topic to extend what I've said, from a different angle: If we are in absolute terms not our ego, and are a zero neutral dimensionless empty awareness field (I'll just call empty awareness from now on) where conscious qualia expresses itself, then it could be said that 'self' as we know it and identify with is not real. i.e. the practice of not self. So this means that what we identify with, such as objects of perception (such as our body) and feelings etc are not us, but our true nature is the empty awareness that we project out of, which through nonduality principals is the timeless and spaceless essence that we all share in common. So this then goes onto say that anything we experience is not us, and we should cling to it, but from a conventional point of view we are our ego, so survival is based on accepting this egoic projection as real, but the teachings say don't cling to it and think that our ego is really real or the absolute truth. Hence our perceived inner world and outer world is the same projection but categorised and labelled differently for sake of self-sustaining agenda by our ego minds with sole purpose as survival. We need to understand this to let it go. And when we let it go we can't escape it but we can at least put it in perspective. This means that in reality there is no really real distinction between our inner and outer world - and what goes on in both is just as real as each other, hence why the teachings emphasize 'thinking' and 'emotions' are just as important as 'speech' and 'actions'. Where I'm heading with this is then the association with 'integrity'. I have found 'integrity' or 'authenticity' requires the realisation that no inner world exists, i.e. dis-identification with a 'private world'. Hence we connect and take seriously the fact that what we have in our minds is absolutely connected with our outside world, hence no secrets, hidden emotions, thoughts that are not aligned to reality, guilt, feelings that are different to what you would show the outside world. Now, when this happens, isn't that called 'presence'. Can't you achieve that state when being 'mindful'. But, it's the next level. It's living like that. Now, it doesn't mean revealing your private life to everyone, and definately doesn't mean acting out your impulses, but it does mean when things arise that are unwholesome to let them go, and if they repeat it's about taking responsibility to see where they arise from and sorting out any latent incompleteness that is causing the thought that doesn't have integrity. I've started living this way and I have seen real shifts in how much 'integrity' has helped me be more mindful, present, finding inner peace and to be more genuine. It's helped me feel more connected with others and myself and reality. I'm interested in any questions or other views that people have on this. Am I just re-creating practices that are already out there? Is this new take on Not Self, NonDuality and Integrity that I'm practicing? Does anyone else do this? Am I making sense? haha

Thanks @PureExp I'll check it out. the website and books look interesting - I'll read up!

Hi there, im really getting into practical applications of nonduality and ideas of not self and the well being achieved when practicing these perspectives. Here is a clip on nonduality I found useful: I'm interested in any other clips, resources or posts anyone would like to share. Peace

Leo, where did you get the idea of 100% responsibility from?

you can't deny the reality of agency and our subjective experience. we are alive single entities and if you deny this you are denying your own existence. yes, we are interconnected by void and awareness, but we shouldn't gloss over the obvious fact that we are separated by division of conscious subjectivity and agency. the problem is both determinism and freewill are both riddled with issues. if it was 100% deterministic then it means all future would be written for us, and it also implies that we should accept no responsibility for our actions. So, that's why I think when you put the two together, to make a hybrid of the two, they seem to mesh nicely and they describe different parts of the same elephant.

what do you mean by false assumptions?

Hi everyone, i listened to Leo's responsibility vs blame vid, and I'm keen to do further reading on this idea of accepting responsibility even if it's not our fault. Anyone have any links or books they can refer me too? Matt

Well done Heisenburger. My morning ritual involves 1 hour reading about spirituality, 30 mins meditation, 15 mins contemplating the top 5 emotions I want to have more in my life, 5 mins looking at a vision board of pictures that reflect my top 5 goals and visions I've set. All that before I have breakfast! After a nutritious and balanced breakfast I then ride my pushbike to work for some physical activity, usually listening to a podcast or up-beat music. I agree, it's been the most powerful routine I've ever started. My routine before was jump out of bed late, rush to work, eat toast and drink coffee. I've come a long way I feel.

Thanks Saarah. I think it's the "responding to our environment and others" and our "internal world" that makes sense when applying the 100% responsibility. I'm still keen on getting more resources that apply this idea, other than the one mentioned. Surely 100% responsibility has to have come from a model or practice?

I have a theory: I see our human experience as a bunch of events that pop in and out of reality that have an impact on the next event that pops up. Our awareness includes one foot in the experience of the event, and the other foot in the void which is where experience arises and falls away. so this creates little micro gaps in between events. We have the power to influence the next arising phenomenological events that arise from the void prior to it expressing itself. On the macro level, classical physics still apply, which is why we can't shift these macro physical properties with our mind, but we can shift easily our mental properties which in turn, shifts the classical physical world in time. Thus we have the deterministic world and the free will interplaying between each other. The deterministic being the expression rising and falling, and the free will being the gaps in between these expressions. Does anyone think that this explanation is similar to other more mature, better written or communicated theories out there?

I've just ordered the book Extreme Ownership, thanks. Has anyone else got any other suggestions? I'm struggling with the concept of the need and the practical application to take 100% responsibility, so I'm keen to get some more education on this so I can shift my focus, as I can realise the benefits from thinking this way, but there's resistance in me as I'm struggling in getting my head around the all encompassing definition of "responsibility" in that there's underlying tones of sense of control over things we can't control, especially others, which is stifling me. Thanks

Thanks ChimpBrain, I'll check it out! much appreciated.