TurquoiseB wrote: > I'll answer this, even though it's a bit of a slam, > because it opens the possibility for a discussion > that I don't think I've seen here before. > > It's related to comments I made about love vs. lust > recently. It's clearly possible to be as *attached* > to love as it is to lust. And in many spiritual > traditions, it's the *attachment* that's the boogey- > man in the equation, not the activity itself. > > So is it the *having* an ego that's the boogeyman > in the realization-of-Self game, or is it the > *attachment* to one's ego that is the boogeyman? > > I'm kinda of the opinion that it's the latter. > > Do I have a big ego? You betcha. Do I *revel* in > having a big ego? You betcha. Am I particularly > *attached* to that ego? I don't think so, because > I've had so *many* of them. I've watched them come > and go for years now, ever since I met the Rama > dude and sat with him in the desert and had my > ego-at-the-time blown out of its socks and watched > it die. > > This is a rap that is *not* gonna resonate with > a lot of people here. Unless you have been in a > situation in which your ego -- your small s self -- > gets blown away and replaced with a *new* ego > on a regular basis, what's to identify with? > > But that's been my experience. So shoot me. :-) > > We'd go out into the desert with Rama as one ego, > and come back for a few days blown out of our > socks, egoless. It would take a day or two for > a new one to take hold. The same thing would > happen at the weekly meetings; it was to a large > extent what we were there for...those periods of > "between-ness" in which the old ego has been blown > away and a new one hasn't yet taken root. > > For those of you who can admit to having dropped > acid, and assuming you actually did *good* acid, > try to remember back to that experience. There > was a *reason* that Tiny Tim stole the basis for > his book "The Psychedelic Experience" from the > "Tibetan Book of the Dead." A good hit of pure > Sandoz was literally like traversing the Bardo. > You entered into the experience with a self, and > the experience pointed out to you in no uncertain > terms that you didn't really have one, and that > Self was all there was. And for a few hours after > the LSD experience, you remained in this "between- > ness" state, with the old self blown away, but > without having a new one (or, horrors, what you > considered the "old" one) taking root again. > > That's very similar to what I'm talking about, > but without the reliance on chemicals. > > I got *used* to this process of having one's ego > blown out of its socks and, a day or so later, > having a new one replace it. It happened on pretty > much a weekly basis -- if not more often -- for > fourteen years. > > THAT is to some extent where I'm "coming from" > when I celebrate the latest and greatest ego or > self I'm wearing. I don't *resent* the small s > selves that play across my Self. I don't confuse > them *with* Self. They are what they are, mere > masks, costumes that Self has chosen to put on for > some reason that probably even it doesn't understand, > long enough to make a nice entrance at some costume > ball. After the ball is over, the costume goes into > the trash bin and the Self "puts on" another self. > > The new one is no more important than the old one. > It has no more, and no less "going for it" than the > last self did. It's Just Another self. > > So do I have an ego, a small s self? You betcha. > But, unlike many here, do I *resent* that small > s self and view it as some kind of barrier to Self, > something that I have to "overcome" or "get past?" > No I do not. My personal experience has taught me > that that's going to happen pretty soon without > my having to do much to "make" it happen. > > You guys are free to interpret all of this however > you want. What you think about this rap, or my > raps on this forum in general, doesn't really affect > me that much. I've only met one person here in real > life; the rest of you are just dots of phosphor. > > I live my life the way I live it. End of story. > Part of the way I have chosen to live it is to *not* > fall into the rut (as I perceive it) of resenting > the self or believing that it's a terrible obstacle > to Self. I have had enough extended experiences of > Self to know that that's not true. So I choose to > have *fun* with the ego, rather than resenting it > or pretending not to have one. OF COURSE I have > one; so do you. And, in my opinion, having exper- > ienced enlightenment for short periods of time, so > do the enlightened. Having an ego during those > periods of enlightenment did *not* prevent my > realization of enlightenment. > > I'm *comfortable* with my ego. I'm comfortable cele- > brating it, and even more comfortable laughing at its > silliness. If you knew me personally, you'd have more > of a feeling for the full *extent* of that silliness. > I can laugh at each silly ego because I know it's not > going to be around that long. Tomorrow morning I'm > likely to wake up and have a whole new ego to laugh > at, and with. What is not to like about all that? > Because it's an indicator of ADD, 'attention deficit disorder'?
"People who can focus only on things that interest them, and disregard less interesting things, are often faced with additional problems such as an academic underachievement, lack of social skills, an inability to stay organized, or complete important tasks. These often result in difficulty with personal relationships, staying employed, or completing an education. People may also stimulate themselves by doing reckless or dangerous activities and thus complicate their lives with physical and legal problems." http://www.add.org/
