Anthony,
 
Thought I'd share this as the topic is relevant to this read.  A variant view..
 I find it quite interesting.  I am bewtween flights, and time is short, but 
perhaps I can add a comment later.. K
 
You might be interested in the email exchange below regarding ego-self and self 
liberation.  This discussion's orientation is from the "relative" view...
 
 >>Happy New year to you and yours. 
I have a question. 

I have noticed you often refer to the ego in your posts. . You refer to its 
dissolution, so I was wondering how you located it? 
How have you been able to identify this "ego" and identify its boundaries, 
location etc. 
If not how is it possible to dissolve that which cannot be found to exist? 
I would love to hear how that is possible. 
 
J:
 
Let's take a look at your question.  Ego is like any other appearance of 
Awareness that is grounded in the mind's conceptualizing process. For instance, 
a person at night mistakes a coil of rope on the ground to be a snake.  There 
is no snake there, never was.  But the mind "thinks" there is one.  He feels 
fear and has broke out in a cold sweat due to his fear of snakes.  He is 
trembling.  The snake doesn't exist and can't be located.  But if I turn the 
light on, and show him the "snake" was a coil of rope, he feels immediate 
relief.  He was freaked out by something that didn't exist. To the mind, an 
imagined snake has the same value as a real snake, if the mind doesn't know the 
truth.  Likewise, the mind mistakes a combination of elements such as a body, 
mind, thoughts, memories, feelings, emotions, perceiver of sensory experiences 
etc. to be a "self" and labels it "me".
This "me" has never existed, but to the mind it does. It even creates the idea 
of "mine" and thinks it owns things.  But ownership is just another 
mind-generated concept.  Then these owned things re-enforce the feeling of me, 
as I have these things to prove that I am a tangible entity that actually 
exists.  If a thief comes to you on the street and takes a large amount of 
important money from you, you would say "Hey that's mine! You can't take that!" 
And you would do all sorts of things to prevent "your" money from being taken.  
Its quite amazing all that can ensue from the mind's belief in an ego-self that 
doesn't exist.  People who have a poor "self-image" often experience clinical 
depression.  Most neurosis is caused by the ego being malformed in childhood 
due to negative conditioning.  So you see, this "imaginary" ego-self has a huge 
impact on people's real world lives.   But the mind can come to see that there 
is no "self" of any kind to be
 found.  The subconscious is projecting this sense of self, and the conscious 
mind has no control over this projection.  There are specific methods, that 
have been around for over 2000 years that can bring the mind to see that this 
"self" is imaginary.  Candice's Great Freedom approach falls short of being 
able to bring the sub-conscious "self"projection to cessation.  Actually, with 
Candice's approach, it is this sub-consciously projected "self" that is 
"resting in Awareness".  It is an effort by this "self" to find peace, 
pleasure, unbounded self-identity as everything, that attracts the ego-mind to 
all of these teachings.  But Candice's approach misses what is causing all of 
these personal and social problems... and that is the mind's compulsive efforts 
to define itself and its world through the labeling and conceptualizing of self 
and things, and further into "me", "mine" and "others". This is how the 
brain/mind organizes its experiential
 world in order to ensure greater likelihood of survival.  When this effort 
drops away, by the mind's recognizing and becoming totally convinced that there 
are no "things" and no possible "self" to grasp , the grasping at 
self-existence ceases which leaves Awareness/Being undefined, just as it is.  
Candice, with Great Freedom is advocating the result without having brought 
about the causes for that result.  Which means for most, that the ego-self 
 


--- On Thu, 1/6/11, Anthony Wu <wu...@yahoo.com.sg> wrote:


From: Anthony Wu <wu...@yahoo.com.sg>
Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: Mindfulness pt 2
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, January 6, 2011, 4:16 PM


  








Ego and mind are different ideas. The former is a component of dualism, along 
with 'things outside'. If you eliminate dualism (good luck, not so easy), your 
problem of fear will be solved. 'Mind' is a philosophical term, to do with 
thinking and spirit. there is no need to separate the two. They are aleady 
separate. For example, JM asks you to cultivate a 'universal mind'. That is a 
wonderful task. If you try to develop a 'universal ego', you will get 30 
beatings from JM.
 
Anthony

--- On Thu, 6/1/11, Dave P <wookielife...@yahoo.ca> wrote:


From: Dave P <wookielife...@yahoo.ca>
Subject: [Zen] Re: Mindfulness pt 2
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, 6 January, 2011, 11:05 PM


  

So how does one separate ego from mind?

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Anthony Wu <wu...@...> wrote:
>
> Dave,
>  
> Fear of dementia, fear of death, fear of fear... are indications of your 
> strong ego. Anything that reduces the ego is helpful.
>  
> Anthony
> 
> --- On Thu, 6/1/11, Dave P <wookielife...@...> wrote:
> 
> 
> From: Dave P <wookielife...@...>
> Subject: [Zen] Re: Mindfulness pt 2
> To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Thursday, 6 January, 2011, 4:16 AM
> 
> 
>   
> 
> 
> 
> To be honest, not particularly :)
> 
> I do have another question, though. For me, mindfulness is associated with 
> intellect. I was wondering if it is possible to practise mindfulness even 
> with cognitive impairment? My main OCD symptom is fear of dementia, and 
> dealing with this particular fear in a mindful way might be beneficial.
> 
> --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, "ED" <seacrofter001@> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > Dave P,
> > 
> > Have Forum members gone too far with their generous and well-intended
> > advice?
> > 
> > --ED
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, "Rev. Joriki Dat Baker" <koryu@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > This has gone far beyond what he asked of the group.
> > >
> > > Joriki
> >
>










      

Reply via email to