Can A Human Function Without An Ego-Self?

[Treks]

Sat Sri Akaal

"Ego" may be described differently among dharmic paths. When I use 'ego-self' or 'ego-mind' (or haumai), I use it to mean the highly constructed psyche\self that presents itself as the model of health and normality, and puts everything else/all others as separate external points of reference.

As a Sikh, I believe the task at hand is to dissolve the ego-self sense of separation. The idea is, this causes one to 'merge' with Everything, become radically

However, I wonder, is it actually psychologically possible to operate without, or with a severely diminished, ego-self?

I'm interested to hear what other followers of dharma who can relate with this concept, have to say about it.

Gurfateh

 

[Taylor Seraphim]

Sat Sri Akaal

"Ego" may be described differently among dharmic paths. When I use 'ego-self' or 'ego-mind' (or haumai), I use it to mean the highly constructed psyche\self that presents itself as the model of health and normality, and puts everything else/all others as separate external points of reference.

As a Sikh, I believe the task at hand is to dissolve the ego-self sense of separation. The idea is, this causes one to 'merge' with Everything, become radically

However, I wonder, is it actually psychologically possible to operate without, or with a severely diminished, ego-self?

I'm interested to hear what other followers of dharma who can relate with this concept, have to say about it.

Gurfateh

If you do not mind, can I answer this question?

 

[Twilight Hue]

Sat Sri Akaal

"Ego" may be described differently among dharmic paths. When I use 'ego-self' or 'ego-mind' (or haumai), I use it to mean the highly constructed psyche\self that presents itself as the model of health and normality, and puts everything else/all others as separate external points of reference.

As a Sikh, I believe the task at hand is to dissolve the ego-self sense of separation. The idea is, this causes one to 'merge' with Everything, become radically

However, I wonder, is it actually psychologically possible to operate without, or with a severely diminished, ego-self?

I'm interested to hear what other followers of dharma who can relate with this concept, have to say about it.

Gurfateh

It all depends upon if you feel you can function without the particular definition you prescribed as ego.

 

[Treks]

If you do not mind, can I answer this question?

Please do.

 

[Treks]

It all depends upon if you feel you can function without the particular definition you prescribed as ego.

Does your religion describe it differently?

 

[George-ananda]

Sat Sri Akaal

"Ego" may be described differently among dharmic paths. When I use 'ego-self' or 'ego-mind' (or haumai), I use it to mean the highly constructed psyche\self that presents itself as the model of health and normality, and puts everything else/all others as separate external points of reference.

As a Sikh, I believe the task at hand is to dissolve the ego-self sense of separation. The idea is, this causes one to 'merge' with Everything, become radically

However, I wonder, is it actually psychologically possible to operate without, or with a severely diminished, ego-self?

I'm interested to hear what other followers of dharma who can relate with this concept, have to say about it.

Gurfateh

Well. in my understanding you would then be in a trance-like state and not be great at conducting worldly business.

 

[Treks]

Well. in my understanding you would then be in a trance-like state and not be great at conducting worldly business.

In your understanding of psychology, or your religion?

 

[George-ananda]

In your understanding of psychology, or your religion?

I guess 'both'. In the mystical state of Oneness you are not functional as an ego entity. You have to come down to the ego level to act.

 

[Taylor Seraphim]

Please do.

We need our egos because it is the part of the consciousness that tells us when we need to do basic things for survival, without it we would die.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Does your religion describe it differently?

Yes. Through ego by which the manifestation of self arises, is essentially described as being a composite called skandhas, or aggregates.

It's not the commonly used Freudian version of self as being a seperate entity independent of it's surroundings by which it identifies.

 

[Sunstone]

It seems to me that the Zen monks have done an excellent job of actually demonstrating that certain kinds of actions are not only possible to perform in a non-ego state, but that they are even in some significant ways performed better in a non-ego state than in an ego state.

For instance, there are numerous accounts of Zen trained swordsmen losing all sense of self in battles. Typically, they are observed by others to fight with skill and ferocity, but when the battle is over, they themselves have no memory of it, even if they have taken a dozen heads. So, apparently, quite complicated behaviors can be executed while in an ego-less state. Moreover, it appears they might even be "perfected" in such a state, too.

There are other behaviors, however, that I think would be much harder or impossible in ego-less state than in an ego-state. For instance: Scheming. To scheme, plot, or plan for the future requires one to visualize, or at least think about, alternatives and things that are currently not the case. It is anything but living in the moment, the Great Now, of an ego-less state.

I'll stop there, but I could go on. It's interesting that you raise this question, Treks. I've collected information about it on and off for years.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

We need our egos because it is the part of the consciousness that tells us when we need to do basic things for survival, without it we would die.

Do you think ego is a product of survival instinct?

 

[wizanda]

If the ego is the outer/inner reflections, it is impossible in the physical world to be without it.... It is the manner in which it is understood, that makes the difference to the Dharma.

So having a false ego, like a big protection bubble, leads to suffering for both self, and those around you.

We all need to meditatie to clean our own ego, so that we make friends with the inner child, and come back to a state of Oneness, between ourselves, and our ego.

 

[Kirran]

I think that having the ego is certainly necessary, but it's our relationship to it (and realising we have a relationship to it, and are not it ourselves) which makes the difference. The ego's a very useful thing - we are just too identified with it

 

[Covellite]

The definition of Ego in the west was set by Freud, and if you read Freud in the original German, he calls the Ego the Ich (the German word for 'I'). In Latin, the word Ego means 'I'. Without an I you cannot be anything in the real world we live in. Ego is synonymous with the conscious mind and it's a part of the more complex psychic apparatus which is composed of different types of consciousnesses. So, human cannot function without ego (there are some exceptions, but it's quite exotic).
The process of transcending the Ego, as described in Eastern and New Age philosophies, is often misinterpreted as meaning to erase the Ego but in fact the opposite is the case. To transcend does not mean to disappear, it means "to no longer be limited by," or "to grow beyond in an integrated way."

 

[allfoak]

The ego self is what makes us an individual.
All this trouble to create an individual and then we should dissolve it?

It seems it would be more accurate to consider that maybe we should become like that which is our source rather than a dissolving into it and as a result lose our individuality.

 

[LuisDantas]

The way I see it, a sufficiently enlightened person will not so much lack an ego-self as be aware of how transitory and of how low priority it actually is.

It might be possible to rebuild it, perhaps in a significantly different form, as well.

I seem to recall that it is apparently something that has to happen after particularly strong or traumatic insights and is described as a powerful, perhaps necessary and often disorienting experience that takes a few hours or days to consolidate itself into a functional state.

 

[Taylor Seraphim]

Do you think ego is a product of survival instinct?

No I believe that survival instinct is a product of the ego.

 

[Covellite]

Do you think ego is a product of survival instinct?

I believe that self importance is a product of the ego.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

No I believe that survival instinct is a product of the ego.

But we're descended from apes, and I assume they would have had a survival instinct but no ego.