arjuna

@Visitor Nicely put. i can relate to a lot of what you said and think i got a better understanding from it, when i read more in the future from other posts using maybe different words, meaning maybe the same... Being an outspoken chaotic, paradigmshifting psychonaut, alot of energy goes into rebalancing and maybe without noticing it, i balance my ego through it, without naming it or be aware of it and that's maybe why i didn't understood what was meant here... every paradigm/model has it's own truth, it's own lies what are true in another model.

Sure! The problem here is, i suppose, that there is a bias "against" the ego, as if it has some life on its own, tricking us into... what exactly? i see no harm to play with the expressed creation and the player is our self in the body. maybe i am mistaken but i have the same feeling, reading here, that people want to get rid of their identity and i don't get it why. it's an identity in this world. i sense some denial of reality in it and a paradox. i believe we wanted to be here and i dont get the point to leave as soon as possible, as if this world and the "ego" is like a sickeness or something... maybe i misinterpret it, but it seems that way... Don't get me wrong. ultimate reality "experienced". no ego "there". source of all, but is this world a fall? is it a progression? if it is a progression, why try to overcome it?

How do you define "illusion"? Who asked this question? the answer is the same.

Thanks for the replies. I come from another school of thought, so to say, even if it is not a "school of thought". I think that the word ego is just a construct, a paradigm so to say. i agree, that when "you experience" ultimate reality or brahman, the ego is not present. it cannot be present otherwise it would interpret and it is not interpretable. i think we differ from the conclusion out of it. not in brahman, there is a feeling of selfness. this observes/constructs "reality" and interprets it, giving a feeling of identity "in the world". now why is that? i think that this self or ego or "I" has a purpose. i think it is real in the same sense "the world" is real to us. not in the sense of brahman whick is ultimate. still i find it to be a kind of vague denial of reality, if we rip the self/ego/I of any meaning of existence. it's paradoxical to say, it has no existence, yet it exists. the mind is not able to comprehend brahman/ultimate reality, so duality in that sense is a construct in itself. now, i am not in brahman, therefore it is so, that the I exists. Denial of it, leads to a paradox/dual/illusionary state of mind. I embrace and accept the "ego" out of these reasons. The mind constructs this world, causality and life for a purpose and to overcome it, as soon we entered it, is possibly not necessary. Why not play with it, why not use it and make the world a richer place? identifying with it, i agree on that, could lead to delusion of grandeur and can cause suffering in the world. But making it to a boogeyman i find is just the same projected superstition like the devil in christianity. just on another level. I think, brahman is where we came from and this "world" is the next level, not brahman. the baby is born from the womb of the mother. does it crawl in it again? no. the word "ego" or "self" or "higher self" never made much sense to me. neuroscience tells us, that the brain projects multiple "I"'s. Active Paradigm shifting helps to not be attached to constructs. i love my self, by doing that truly, attachment is not possible, it would suffocate my self.

What do you guys think about Chaos Magick? Does anyone here practice it?