--- In [email protected], "curtisdeltablues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "curtisdeltablues" > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > <snip> > > > I don't view the ego in the way you seem to be using it and > > > losing my personality is not a goal for me. > > > > As I understand it, enlightenment doesn't mean > > "losing" one's personality, only the attachment > > to and identification with it. The personality > > remains as it was. > > That was how I understood it in MMY's system also. I was > commenting on the Koan: > > "I'd like to give you the following koan: > If you loose your own personality, you can afford to be non-equal."
I suspect he'd be willing to rewrite it as: If you lose your attachment to/identification with your own personality, you can afford to be non-equal. I think he makes a good point that insistence on equality can mean not just humble unwillingness to give oneself a higher status, but prideful (egoic) unwillingness to accept a *lower* status. > I think it is pretty clear that personalities don't diminish in any > way from spiritual practices judging from this group! You bet, and Michael is certainly no exception.
