--- In [email protected], Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Jack Smith wrote: > > --- In [email protected], Peter <drpetersutphen@> wrote: > > > >> Well, as you know, you can't experience CC because > >> nobody's there to experience anything or, more > >> accurately, to experience nothing. he-he! > >> > >> > > > > To clarify: "nobody's there to experience anything" means that the ego > > (the self) has gone. > > > > I tend to define the word ego as the "pathological ego" to distinguish > > it from ahamkar. The "pathological ego" is the time-bound sense of > > self-identity based completely in the relative. > > > > Given those definitions, I seriously doubt the ego is completely gone > > in the state of CC. > > > Even MMY once said the only people without egos are dead people. There > still has to be some remains of ignorance. > > Once when one of my employees said he had no ego, I asked, "should I be > contacting your next of kin?" :) >
It seems to me that MMY could only have been speaking of ahamkar which is often translated as ego. However, there are ancient traditions that hold it as a truth that the pathological ego (what we normally call ego) can be completely (or, if we want to hedge, nearly completely) let go. Understanding the difference between something that gives us individual self-awareness (ahamkar) and something that arises from the mistake of the intellect (pathological ego) is critical. I do not think MMY ever addressed this in any detail. (It might be due to the fact that MMY remained a megalomaniac himself and therefore wasn't able to see the pathological ego clearly. ;)
