l o v e

[zhao]

One of my friends who lived in Westchester county had a maid who was Tibetan who lived on their third floor. She randomly had this kid, and he was chosen as the Pan-Chen Lama!!

Well, we used to trip all the time over there, because he had this big pool with tennis courts in his back yard. Once we were like two days in and all of these Tibetan monks showed up lighting incense everywhere and singing!! It was awesome, one of the most memorable things that I have ever seen.

They were very nice to us even though we were obviously a mess.

sounds really cool. and tripping! must've been really... trippy

yeah buddhists dont judge. and don't try to convert anybody...

but here i should make it clear that i do not subscribe to any romanticized, idealized views of Tibetan Buddhism, and am fully aware of the human rights violations in Tibet, and some of the dodgy (to say the least) practices of the Dali Lama. but still. there is magic in those teachings. there is truth.

 

[nomadologist]

It sure does have an effect on them, they just DON'T CARE.

They have material being, there's no way you could snort a kilo of coke and not feel it. There's no way you could snort a 20 bag and not feel it.

 

[nomadologist]

sounds really cool. and tripping! must've been really... trippy

yeah buddhists dont judge. and don't try to convert anybody...

but here i should make it clear that i do not subscribe to any romanticized, idealized views of Tibetan Buddhism, and am fully aware of the human rights violations in Tibet, and some of the dodgy (to say the least) practices of the Dali Lama. but still. there is magic in those teachings. there is truth.

It was like the perfect end to any trip. Tibetan monks should show up every time!

 

[noel emits]

and in order to acheive inner peace and enlightment, the ego must be destroyed.

Clarification of terms is going to be important here.

Ego(1) = Sense of self as a separate individual entity.

Ego(2) = The part of the personality concerned with presenting an image to the world.

Ego(2) can then be divided into two separate parts I think - Ego(2a) a partly 'false' construct consisting of received attitudes and other psychological detritus, and Ego(2b) a more authentic 'self' underlying and often obscured by the first part.

There is an Ego(2c) but that's for another post.

So we have two things really - sense of self as singular being, and then personality constructs.

I'd say it's useful to dissolve Ego(1) temporarily for a number of reasons - to gain perspective, freedom and release from the limited self.

That then leads on to learning the difference between Ego(2a) and Ego(2b) which is a hugely valuable and rewarding process and does not necessarily entail the loss of self as separate entity.

 

[nomadologist]

Exactly, Noel. I don't think the "Ego" really has anything to do with these personality structures; or rather, it has far less to do with them than many unconscious mechanisms and other structural psychological functions.

It's really the Super-Ego that should be destroyed, if you try to translate Zhao's terms into Freudian ones.

 

[nomadologist]

Sounds kind of like the monks are just attaining to schizophrenia like D&G, if you think about complete ego dissolution.

Nothing good really happens then, I can tell you, the Id takes over and its a mess. You end up wanting to die.

 

[zhao]

from A.H. Almaas:

Ego Death

It is clear here that the ego or self which is annihilated in ego death is not the ego of depth psychology and it is not the actual self. It is specifically the self-identity. The death of this identity merely means that there is no barrier or resistance to the Presence of Essence.

Ego death and reality

To be completely you means being alone. When this is experienced, it will bring very deep grief and sadness. You have to learn to say good-bye to everything you have loved -- not just your Mommy and Daddy, your boyfriend and your cat, but to your feelings, your mind, your ideas. You are in love with all of these. Letting go of them will feel like a great loss, even a death. It is not you who dies. What dies is everyone else. In the experience of ego death, you don't feel you're dying; you feel everybody else is dead. You feel you're all alone, totally alone. You have lost a boundary which was constructed from past experiences. But this boundary never really existed! It was just a belief. When you experience reality as it is, there is no sense of boundaries or of being separate, of inside or outside. (Diamond Heart Book 2, pg 169)

Ego death and unity

Experiencing this unity reveals to us that life is beautiful. Prior to this, when you experience yourself moving from the state of the physical or of the personality to the state of the essential or of the boundless dimensions, there is the feeling that life is a problem. The best option seems to be to get away from life, and one may long to disappear or die. From the perspective of unity, there is no such thing as dying, nor of being reborn. There is no such thing as ego death, and no such thing as enlightenment either, since you are already the unity. This is the state of affairs all the time and always -- before you develop an ego, when it is dissolving, and after you are dissolved. All those parts are the unity itself, and so you are not going anywhere. (Facets of Unity, pg 88)

...

The capacity for global disidentification allows us to be permanently in touch with our essential presence, although the identity and the self-representation remains in experience. This condition allows the experience of self-realization to arise, at least occasionally, when the identity relaxes to the extent of total absorption by (or into) essential presence. The more this capacity for global disidentification develops, the more frequent, and the deeper, are the experiences of self-realization. This development continues, in principle, until permanent, full self-realization, where total global disidentification coincides with complete absorption of the self-representation, and complete openness and flexibility of identity.

rest of article here

from wiki:

For the ego in psychology, especially Freud and Jung's concept of ego, see Ego, super-ego, and id. For other uses, see Ego.

In spirituality, and especially nondual, mystical and eastern meditative traditions, the human being is often conceived as being in the illusion of individual existence, and separated from other aspects of creation. This "sense of doership" or sense of individual existence is that part which believes it is the human being, and believes it must fight for itself in the world, is ultimately unaware and unconscious of its own true nature. The ego is often associated with mind and the sense of time, which compulsively thinks in order to be assured of its future existence, rather than simply knowing its own self and the present.[1][2]
The spiritual goal of many traditions involves the dissolving of the ego,[citation needed] allowing self-knowledge of one's own true nature to become experienced and enacted in the world. This is variously known as Enlightenment, Nirvana, Presence, and the "Here and Now".
Eckhart Tolle comments that, to the extent that the ego is present in an individual, that individual is somewhat insane psychologically, in reference to the ego's nature as compulsively hyper-active and compulsively (and pathologically) self-centered. However, since this is the norm, it goes unrecognised as the source of much that could be classified as insane behavior in everyday life.[citation needed] In South Asian traditions, the state of being trapped in the illusory belief that one is the ego is known as maya or samsara.

from Enlightenment magazine:

Enlightenment equals ego death. For millennia this equation has held true. While the term "ego," meaning "I" in Latin, is obviously a relatively recent addition to the English lexicon, just about every major enlightenment teaching in the world has long held that the highest goal of spiritual and indeed human life lies in the renunciation, rejection and, ultimately, the death of the need to hold on to a separate, self-centered existence. From Shankara's rantings against the ego as a "strong and deadly serpent" to Muhammad's declaration of a "holy war against the nafs [ego]" to the Zen masters' fierce determination to use any means necessary to break the ego's grip on their students, this "ego-negative" interpretation of the spiritual path has remained enshrined in enlightenment teachings for ages, for the most part unquestioned and unchallenged.

 

[nomadologist]

I don't know WHO posted that second thing, but they don't know shit about depth psychology.

 

[zhao]

i have a lot of work to do today, so won't be on as much. but i'd like to finish the summary i started yesterday:


love by zhao
expanded and remastered collector's edition

love gives, and does not take away. it makes life fuller, not more deprived. it is empowering, and does not weaken. love provides more options, and is not restrictive. love leads to freedom, not traps. love allows one to more fully realize one's potentials, instead of deminishing those possibilities.

and it involves an absolution, dissolving of the ego, which IS restrictive, which locks us in our minds, in our patterns and habits, and is a closed system. ego is illusion, it is a false sense of the self. and must be destroyed if one is to be free.

breaking the limits of the ego is not the same as losing touch with who you are. death of the ego makes it possible to become who you are completely and fully, without the hindrance and cages of petty selfishness, greed, and desire.

the rational ego holds on to pain. love gives us the strength to let go -- to forgive, to recover, to heal. and with love, anyone can heal themselves from any wound (of course the worse the injury, the more difficult it is), provided that they want to get better, and believe that it is possible to get better.

(there are no absolutes) more healthy relationships can be acheived through each partner working on themselves, over coming their issues (again, no absolutes), and becoming more conscious, more free, more healthy, and better human beings in and of themselves. through this and constant care, communication, connection, the real bliss of love (see first paragraph) can blossom.



love,

zhao

 

[nomadologist]

after people become more healthy, they become better oiled capitalist consumption machines I'm afraid.

I have no interest in that.

 

[nomadologist]

bliss of love? this gets funnier all the time

you should write the new age primer for dummies, Zhao

 

[nomadologist]

Another problem with this idea: some people get off on pain. They like it. It's blissful to them.

 

[zhao]

after people become more healthy, they become better oiled capitalist consumption machines I'm afraid.

I have no interest in that.

no. destruction of the ego is Capitalism's worst fear. because Capitalism is based on the ego. it is based on desire.

if one is entirely at peace and has overcome desire, s/he destroys capitalism.

 

[nomadologist]

No, desire comes from the Id, it is everything that is disavowed, everything we can't represent, everything the reality principle has to repress.

 

[nomadologist]

Unfortunately, there are huge gaps in "Eastern" thinking that don't account for abnormal psychology, paraphilias, mental illness, or any number of obviously observable realities that we deal with on a daily basis.

 

[zhao]

No, desire comes from the Id, it is everything that is disavowed, everything we can't represent, everything the reality principle has to repress.

it is ironic that someone who reads so much D&G should cling so tightly to Freud's ideas.

the oedipal model is a trap. a trap of misery. there is a way out, whether you are capable of accepting that or not.

Unfortunately, there are huge gaps in "Eastern" thinking that don't account for abnormal psychology, paraphilias, mental illness, or any number of obviously observable realities that we deal with on a daily basis.

sure it does. but apologize that i haven't the time today to do the research for you.

 

[gek-opel]

Another problem with this idea: some people get off on pain. They like it. It's blissful to them.

I agree with this. What about familial love though? That seems just as problematic to me as romantic-sexual. There is almost no factoring in of desert either with familial love, a parent is expected as a matter of course to love their child (via genetic and social pressures). As a child this led me to feel extremely alienated from familial love as a merely deterministic process devoid of rationale (or rather, devoid of personalised, specific rationale, and hence bereft of any substance). It rendered familial love a sinister thing, a robotic orthodoxy where you can see through the illusory sense of personal free will to the socio-linguistic/genetic programme-code beneath...

 

[nomadologist]

Yes, I am "incapable" of recognizing the pitfalls of Freudian psychoanalysis. I only spent 8 years studying it. I was a research assistant to the person who wrote the forward to the Cambridge Companion to Freud.

I don't "cling" to Freud's ideas, I present them as a counterpoint to new age mysticism.

D&G, if you'd ever READ Anti-Oedipus, have not fully abandoned the Id, or similar mechanisms, as the driving forces of "desire."

D&G actually posit a positive theology of desire (to Derrida's negative theology), and it's very interesting exactly what they pick and choose to "cling to" of Freud's.

I AM schizo, I successfully failed to be "Oedipalized" according to D&G.

What's your excuse?

 

[zhao]

intelligent people put up the most resistance to ideas that they can benefit from. intelligence is an army the ego uses to hold on to its control, it is like a fortress which protects the ego against freedom.

you are really intellgent Nomad. that's why you "talk circles" around your therapists. and that's why you will be trapped in your own thinking for a long time, and suffer unnecessarily for a very long time. there is so much negativity in you, so much resistance, so much pain. I speak words of healing and of love with the best of intentions, and you are only interested in resisting, in dismissing, in mocking, and in discrediting. you would rather hold on to your pain rather than consider the possibility of letting it go. you are afraid of letting go. i hope you do get over the endlessly miserable oedipal traps someday, and i sincerely hope you keep growing and overcome whatever in your life you need to overcome.

love

zhao

 

[nomadologist]

I agree with this. What about familial love though? That seems just as problematic to me as romantic-sexual. There is almost no factoring in of desert either with familial love, a parent is expected as a matter of course to love their child (via genetic and social pressures). As a child this led me to feel extremely alienated from familial love as a merely deterministic process devoid of rationale (or rather, devoid of personalised, specific rationale, and hence bereft of any substance). It rendered familial love a sinister thing, a robotic orthodoxy where you can see through the illusory sense of personal free will to the socio-linguistic/genetic programme-code beneath...

It is deeply problematic. The social codes of conduct governing "motherhood" in particular drive me insane--my mother did everything "right" according to these, but she was not really "there" in a fundamental way.

There's new research that indicates children of clinically depressed parents who go untreated during their children's infancy and childhood are far far more likely to have mental illness.

Whether you like Freud or not, you can see the Oedipal play itself out over and over in these families who act according to the "mandate" of biological love.