What is ego?

[mandyjw]

1 hour ago, The Buddha said:

The only true insight I had of ego is "I am not necessary" wich are those kind of moments where you are pulled out and you are not, yet you are.

Can you explain what you mean by this more? 

[Nahm]

2 hours ago, The Buddha said:

I have noticed that there is a thing which is common to all traditions and doctrines. They all without exception talk about the ego.

They all, without exception, experience thought attachment, which is and is the perpetuation of the ‘traditions & doctrines’, which is aversion to, of, away from, the Truth. It is fear of cessation / end of the thought attachment / monkey mind, activity of thought which is ‘the separate self’. Turns out though it’s pure bliss, for no one & every one. 

Quote

And if I'm truly honest I don't fully understand what is ego. It's so fishy that seems impossible to tackle.

Incredible honesty! Nice. Also, I is a thought. 

Quote

The only true insight I had of ego is "I am not necessary" wich are those kind of moments where you are pulled out and you are not, yet you are.

And that would be thought attachment, believing there is an I, and this I is or is not necessary. 

Quote

I hope you can bring some light and profound insights on the topic, especially a good pointer would be very appreciated.

Meditation, emotional expression & understanding. 

This is opinion & suggestion, and is not any implication of making a doctrine. 

Only the light can ‘bring’ the light. Only the light is the light - and not a single thought about will do. ‘Profound insights’ is still thought attachment. The desire for, points to ‘the ego‘, or ‘separate self’ (which is only the activity of thought, and attachment therein). 

[snowyowl]

3 hours ago, Nahm said:

Also, I is a thought. 

I don't disagree, but ... isn't the I thought a consequence of feelings of aversion and desire such as: 

hunger >> I want food 

fear >> I want out 

pleasure >> I want more 

cold >> I want heat 

As if there's something conditioned or instinctive going on. The mind programmed to create the I thought for self-preservation. 

[Nahm]

@snowyowl

I agree it does seem like that. Also, the I thought is, a thought. Consequence, is also a thought… and so on… self-preservation, is also a thought. 

[The Buddha]

4 hours ago, Nahm said:

They all, without exception, experience thought attachment, which is and is the perpetuation of the ‘traditions & doctrines’, which is aversion to, of, away from, the Truth. It is fear of cessation / end of the thought attachment / monkey mind, activity of thought which is ‘the separate self’.

As much as I agree, you must build an ecosystem for enlightenment, otherwise it's going to be almost a cryme not to offer enlightenment as a possiblity. Building tools and wisdom that can be developed over the time is crucial for evolving this dream, I mean there is nothing better to do. You must ground the teachings and make them useful in a way that can be meaningful. Isn't that what Actualized.org is anyway? Isn't that what Actuality of being is anyway?

4 hours ago, Nahm said:

‘Profound insights’ is still thought attachment

Could be the case but what is beautiful about profound insights is that they are the only though which somehow make a bridge to the beyond. Probably because the beyond is integral and also permeats the thought, at least in the beggining as it still infuses the thinking phenomena.

4 hours ago, Nahm said:

The desire for, points to ‘the ego‘, or ‘separate self’

That is totally true. However, to be in the world you must also desire. Desire for enlightenment, for example, is the desire that ends desires. Also you must desire to breath, to eat, to take shower... Probably you can arguee that all that happens by itself, which is a fair point, but I don't buy that one can be totally desireless-free-unbound, for you must maintain (as far as you want to be alive) and sustain the physical body. You must be biased towards life and not towards death, maybe it is not desire what is making that but it's a something else which I ignore, or a recontextualization of desire. However, desire is an amazing pointer I'm very grateful for that. I'm being very peacky because I'm very biased towards the trascendental and I'm really working to also honor my human nature and experience, to express fully the divine in human form rather than just being "in the clouds" all day long.

 

[Mosess]

ego is your whole life.

All of it with out an exception 

[snowyowl]

@Nahm well yes, but we need to think about it to have this discussion  

[The Buddha]

 

5 minutes ago, Nahm said:

@snowyowl

I agree it does seem like that. Also, the I thought is, a thought. Consequence, is also a thought… and so on… self-preservation, is also a thought. 

Then, what is the source of thought? If your statement is that ego is a thought or group of them, what is the source of mind/thought?

 

 

 

[Nahm]

@snowyowl

That’s a thought. It’s assumed. Find it in perception. 

@The Buddha

Source is a thought. Source of thought, is a thought. Source of mind/thought, is a thought. 

Group of them is one thought. Like the thought ‘a hundred thoughts’ is not a hundred thoughts, but is one thought. 

[The Buddha]

@mandyjw

Yes, first of all it has to be understood that all insights it's not what is said or realised but maybe the final key or the final unraveling of a knot.

So, I acknowledged that there is an I, there is a sense of me, and for the first time the understanding of the ego was not as looked with distance but it was me. So after that, I realized that being that the case at the moment, this I (me, myself) is not necessary at all for everything to unfold naturally and gracefully. Literally that I, this I, could die and everything would go on beautifully.

[Mosess]

i've got a crazy ass question to pose for yall to wrap your heads around,

In your direct experience, name a thing that was not thought of before.

[The Buddha]

5 minutes ago, Nahm said:

Source is a thought. Source of thought, is a thought. Source of mind/thought, is a thought. 

Group of them is one thought. Like the thought ‘a hundred thoughts’ is not a hundred thoughts, but is one thought. 

[snowyowl]

10 minutes ago, Nahm said:

@snowyowl

That’s a thought. It’s assumed. Find it in perception. 

But everything we type here goes through a thought process (it's words), so to keep saying "that's a thought" is true enough but I don't get your drift. 

I find things in perception first (inbetween typing). Even thoughts exist in perception ... nay, thoughts are perceptions (there's no in perception). 

Edit - typing is also perception so perception continues. 

Edited December 23, 2021 by snowyowl

[Baum]

 

[Nahm]

22 minutes ago, snowyowl said:

But everything we type here goes through a thought process (it's words), so to keep saying "that's a thought" is true enough but I don't get your drift. 

Open the front door…

Quote

I find things in perception first (inbetween typing). Even thoughts exist in perception ... nay, thoughts are perceptions (there's no in perception). 

And watch all the ‘thoughts in perception’ blow away with the wind (also not in perception).

[snowyowl]

Ok maybe this is all to do with pointing.

Most perceptions (forms of consciousness) are just themselves. Sights, sounds, smells etc. 

Thoughts, including the I thought, are perception-pointers, a specialised type of perception which isn't just itself, it's also symbolically pointing to something which isn't itself.  So they entail a split, a separation between this (the symbolic thought which points) and that (what's pointed to). 

I is the thought which self-references to the thinker. Symbolically of course. 

Edited December 23, 2021 by snowyowl

[Raptorsin7]

@snowyowl Nice explanation.

Any thoughts on how to dissolve the sense of a thinker, or what to do once you are aware of the I thought. I am aware of thinking, but then what

[snowyowl]

@Raptorsin7  in my explanation, the thinker is only a symbol (not 'real') so it's dissolved when you realise it isn't a perception, rather it's the thought which is a perception and therefore 'real'. Pointing is only imaginary after all. 

But if like me you need a 'how to', well that's the spiritual practice isn't it: meditation, relaxation, chanting, movement, watching the sunset, whatever works for you really. 

[Raptorsin7]

@snowyowl when I become aware of a thought as only thiught, I immediately become aware of the visual field. I can then become aware of just the visual field. Is this the right track?

My issue with your relaxation advice is I believe I've done all those things but I don't ever feel truly relaxed. 

Only psychidelics have ever dissolved all this to where I felt truly good 

[snowyowl]

@Raptorsin7  You are noticing what's going on so defo the right track. The visual field is always there while your eyes are open and it's not dark. So from what you say, this sounds like an issue of focused attention vs peripheral awareness. Unfortunately thoughts have this habit of gate-crashing into attention and pushing other fields (like vision) into the periphery and, worse still, into external objects.of which the thinker is the subject.