It has the same nature, but what makes the ego different from the self is that the self is an identity used on occasion, and the ego is an identity that can’t be dropped.
I don’t understand, could you please give your reasoning or describe how you came to this conclusion.
Also, who is using the self? Who is using the ego? Who is using these identities?
There is no “who”. The self is created by the mind to serve a useful purpose only when needed, and the ego is the self established by overuse. That is, when used constantly rather than occasionally, the mind forgets that it is nothing but thought and is deluded into thinking it is the identity it created for occasional use.
Tricky stuff - If I followed that correctly, it would seem that its all just thought playing tricks on itself.
It seems that way at first, but the mind is not playing tricks on itself. If the mind behaves a certain way often enough or continuously, that behavior becomes the new normal, or default mode. So if you spend more time with other people than alone, you “become” the identity used for that purpose; you forget that your identity is a fabrication.
So the mind is not tricky, its just forgetful?
About thought playing tricks on itself it’s interesting to listen to a video of Bohm about this matter: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emAeFuwtelQ&list=PL0C3373847C423315&index=48&t=2s
Thought being a mechanical process is not intelligent so it puts itself in a cul de sac…
1 Like
Is the self real ?
Yes - its a form of deception.
1 Like
…and it’s such a hard work to unveil this deception!
I think there is a link between patterns, habits, ego and deception. It’s something I’ve experimented myself in myself and in others. My job consisted in working with motor patterns, i.e. those patterns we learn in our infancy and which allow us to move in a functional way like walking, standing, running, playing a musical instruments and so on.
The nervous systems, at an elementay level, works through patterns. Some are inherited and some are learnt. The problem with motor patterns, for instance the way one walks or stands, is that once this pattern is recorded and used for long time we feel it’s perfectly OK, that it’s natural even when it’s not. This is a deception.
I’ve been trained to recognise unfunctional motor patterns in myself and in others and to replace them with a functional one. This may have a decisive importance with people who suffer from back pain for example.
K. Spoke often of habits and habits are only patterns of the nervous sysem. Again we find a deception because we feel that our habits are natural. As in motor patterns, it requires a deep awareness to discover they are not natural at all.
You can’t imagine how we can be deceived by our nervous system (which works mechanically), I’ve seen people doing absurd things with their bodies and yet when I pointed that out to them they refused or were incapable of seeing they were using their bodies wrongly.
The ego is a bundle of memories, recordings, patterns, habits. The ego IS a habit.
Your affirmation implies that there is a “true” identity opposed to a mannered one. Is that so?
All identities constitute the ego. We are the sum of our identifications and this identification process is responsible for the birth of the I. A baby does not have an ago at first, then he starts identifying with his body, his inner sensations, with his mother body, and slowly with all the expeiences he has untill he distinguishes between himelf and the outerworld.
It’s adaptable, plastic. If the social identity (self) is used frequently enough, it becomes the default mode of operation.
I have been reading a very interesting dialogue between Dr. Bohm and K in the book, Limits of Thought. Thought thinks that it is a living entity. It’s not, of course. But it has invented the self to represent that illusion.
Unfortunately, no amount of effort can get rid of the deception - learning that the self is not a thing that exists of itself and that it is the definition of suffering itself might one day come in useful. But the self cannot get rid of the self.
The deception can only be seen as deception when we are willing to abandon the self . But being willing to give up the self is like dying. This is very scary - nobody in his right mind would do such a thing - there must be an inescapable need - something seen as more important than the self.
To see that fear and suffering is a deception of the self - we must abandon all hope and give up - there must be an urgent need to see if there’s anything on the other side - and obviously some trust in the fact that there is.
The first time I saw that suffering was a deception of the self was when I decided that I was going to stay still in an uncomfortable position despite the fact that the severe pain I was feeling led me to believe that I would sustain serious injury by doing so - the instant I decided that I was honestly willing to sacrifice myself - the pain completely dissapeared.
The deception dissapears if we are willing to let go of it - Its not an effort, its a giving up - and it certainly does not dissapear forever - the self is constantly arising
Yes Jack tha’s right. And it has also invented the thinker , separate from his thoughts, as a permament entity trying to consolidate his impermanents thoughts. All what the thinker do is keep repeting all the gathered informations, dead memories, . And it is trying to find something new, about time , or meditation or whatever. But thought will never discover anything new. Thought is just an accumulation of knowledge, experiences, and nothing new will never come out of it. Thought and his pseudo separate thinker is like a dog chasing his tail. Direct experience is something different. Without direct experience, all is but speculation, illusion, confusion.
2 Likes
What a great and honest answer you have written! I agree totally with all you say.
Mine was just a wise crack. You managed to pin the core of the problem -which is also an answer to the question: why we did not change after all these years.
The self cannot get rid of the self. There has been a precise moment in my search and study of K. that I had the precise realization “This is like comitting suicide. I don’t want to die”. And that was the end of the whole thing.
“There must be an inescapable need - something seen as more important than the self.”
That is another thing which I have felt and which prevented me from throwing in the towel. I feel that there is a huge reality which is not me - life - humanity - nature - and I feel my response to that is inadequate. There is an idea in Indian traditional spirituality, that life pushes us towards illumination. This could be true in the sense you pointed out: the discovery of something more important than the self.
I read your post just after I got up from bed this morning: a fine way to start the day (
1 Like
Isn’t this an irreconcilable conflict?
I don’t doubt your experience but what uncomfortable position were you forcing your body to stay in? I ask because bodily pain is an interoceptive alert signal, and not to respond to it could lead to injury.
Yes - Also it is considered more “real” than mental anguish - thats why I am sharing the story.
I’m saying they (mental and physical) are more interdependant than we think.
For example, a valium is sometimes much more effective whilst “suffering” at the hands of a dentist say, than actual anaesthetic
The position I was in is not really important (it was the lotus) - It was during some weird 10 day retreat I had gone on in my late 20’s -The main thing is that I had been struggling with this unfamiliar and painful position for the last 3 days and was wondering whether I was causing myself injury - and we were now being asked to stay still in this position for around 6 hours a day in 45 minute sessions.
The point is, when I gave up caring about the pain - it stopped instantly - from worrying about having to go to hospital, to utter astonishment - as soon as the fear was let go of, all the physical symptoms completely dissapeared.
It constantly feeds itself
Because it never realizes that it is an illusion
Only on a practical level, like driving a car, learning to program computers, drawing, eating, etc. The “unbreakable bad habit” only exists on a psychological level. Just because the self thinks that by modifying itself it will be able to solve the problem of its constant suffering and dissatisfaction, without realizing that a modified self is still a self.
“We don’t know how” is the same as saying “the self doesn’t know how”, which is an oxymoron, since it implies that the self is acting on itself to learn. That is: it is still the self, and the self can never use itself properly, however much it tries to learn and modify itself (I’m not talking about practical daily life, but on a psychological level). The self at the psychological level can only be properly used by wisdom (or the absence of a psychological self based on identification with experience and memory). As long as that does not happen, it will be the self that tries to use wisdom (inappropriately) and so totally erring the way and creating suffering in itself and others (selves).