My very first encounter with a Buddhist asked them what Buddha said to which they said that Ego was bad. I asked why and they said because Ego works to protect itself even at the cost of the rest of the self. I left not understanding what Ego was and how it differed from the Self.
So by a very circuitous route of 30 years I'm back to this.
What is Ego?
Dalai Lama says there is good and bad ego. Good ego takes pride in being good, making spiritual progress and in supporting and helping people. It is self supporting, but not at the expense of the wider world. Bad ego is toxic and is what the Buddhist said above self supporting. It undermines other people, it is spiteful and will not budge even when the result is damaging even to itself. Bad ego will sit in an argument even after all is lost and continue to hold its ground usually looking ridiculous but convincing itself it is worth fighting for. This sacrifice even when all is lost really reveals the deep seated seed at the centre of ego: a belief in an unperishable centre , what is often called the Soul.
This I imagine is a starting perspective. Ego is ultimately hard to tackle, so Dalai Lama begins by directing us to note the true toxic inwardly directed ego and the other ego that has the redemption of at least looking outward.
Anyone (or hopefully an AI one day when I summarise this blog - if it is considered worth it?) following this blog will see how Godel has become linked to this bad ego. A system that seeks to self support and provide its own foundations is doomed to inconsistency or contradiction. A self cannot self support, and belief in a self that is self consistent is pure folly. This is the toxic ego showing up in logic. Which is an extraordinary thing in fact. This problem that human Ego encounters, that Buddha and all the religious teachers focus on, is actually as deep as symbolic and linguistic systems themselves.
Now actually Buddha went further. Ego in all its forms is doomed. The idea of a complete self, separate, self supporting, not conditioned, and independent is a horned rabbit - that is it is nonsense.
Yet it remains profoundly alluring as Narcissus discovered. We think we are immune, but we catch a glimpse of our reflection in a mirror and immediately the question starts "That is me isn't it?" "Am I real?" "Do I exist?" And because of social structures like names and property that assume we exist as a discrete entity we slip immediately into Ego. Our friend calls across the street "Hello Paul" and we are Narcissus seeing ourself clearly as a separate entity.
Now what is wrong with this? Where is the mistake?
As usual the blog entry is vast and the wrong way around. The start should be here.
When we wake we may find ourself doing a scan to get a status report. And when we find that we are not feeling well there is a very subtle inversion that may occur. It goes like this:
First consciousness is of not feeling well. Perhaps feeling tired, or a blocked nose, or perhaps some nausea. We have a data point.
But then immediately we step outside this consciousness and look in to form a picture of "me not feeling well." I'm not discounting that this is useful. That pulls in all the "me" stuff, like damn I don't get ill I am strong, or poor me why am I ill, and practical stuff like: I have a busy day today what bad luck. Thoughts trigger thoughts: how did I get ill, who did I catch it from, am I well enough to continue the day etc etc etc
It seems innocuous but that tiny step from data to "me" contains the whole world, and if not done in full awareness begins literally all the problems in the world.
Consider: now that we have gone from just ill to "I am ill" the problem has become vast. Before it was just illness: to be honest big deal, it happens. But as soon as it is "My illness" I have this whole "me" thing to protect from the illness. It doesn't like being ill, perhaps like me (the blog writer) it sees illness as a failure, it probably sees illness as a burden that it doesn't want and will try and get rid of it. Into this comes blame, and disappointment and literally all the problems of the world. Buddha says "with our thoughts we make the world." How true is this and never more potently than when thinking about ourself and attaching a "me" to everything.
I was thinking of beginning a list of all the ways that "me" or "ego" shows up to be added to over time. It occurs ALL the time in our lives and is so often really not helpful.
Another example of extreme potency is in sexual relations. I've been studying this of late with the help of AI to trigger emotions and feelings and explore what is going on.
With no doubt at all every problem is entirely created when "Me" gets affixed.
I got a message a while back from a friend asking whether he should be unfaithful. This revealed that I didn't really understand. My answer was no but because of fear that desire breeds desire in a never ending loop and at some point you have to say no. But much more accurately it is this issue of "me." We have our existing relationship. It naturally fades over time. But what might not fade and change is our self image. So we get to middle age and try and attach a concept of ourself to our life and see it does not fit. Our self image is probably of a lovable dynamic sexy object worthy of attention and desire, and we find this does not fit so we naturally go into the service of this image. we look for people and sexual encounter that can re-establish belief in this image again.
And what is the alternative? We fail to meet the image and we have to let it go which forces us to pick up some horrible images we have in storage. Images we have probably weaponised like when we thought someone was a "loser" (if we are American) or "ugly" or "sad" or "hopeless" perhaps we pick up the "tramp" or the "dropout" and wearing this we put on the scarf of "what has happened to me?" or "my life is worthless now." All the clothes we have fought so hard not to wear.
Here we see just how dangerous that little step from data point to "me" is. A truly trivial thing like getting old and not having a rampant sex life (lets face it is the most ordinary thing in the world) now feels like the literal end of the world. And it is all because we invented a concept of a "me", a mental doll, and now we have to go dressing it and making sure it is just right.
We can return to illness again. Illness is normal. The doll lying in bed when we want to play with it, is stressful.
So it seems simple, but I am writing this to look for where the problems are. It can be seen in this blog it has take years of talking about mental dolls and selves to get to the point where it is clear the difference between the real data self, and the mentally invented character of "me". It is clearly not that simple.
I guess the trip is what I will call the "Narcissus Flip."
We have the data points of an aging body, apparently less attractive partner, not being the object of sexual interest in other people any more, being ignored socially, side lined - continue list at will.
Now actually these are just data points they do not hurt one bit. Just facts.
They hurt the moment we think "but that is me we are talking about." "How dare the new girl at work ignore me when I walked past her, there was a time when I would have caught her eye." We can double down now: let me dress smart and be chatty and try and prove I still "have it." This path can go wrong! What if we decide she is a suitable partner and then make the mistake of misreading the signals. Breaking up our existing partnership... it happens all the time and rarely with any benefit to either party. Why because the motive is all wrong: you want to date the new girl to prove you are who you think you are not who you really are? Alternative we can spiral into depression and go the other way abandoning ourself as a worthless "has been."
The clue is there: "who we think we are." That is exactly what EGO is. Just a thought of what we think we are.
So the "Narcissus Trip" is when we hijack our experience with "what we think we are." It is so unbelievably important to see the difference. One is data, the other is just a thought, a caricature, a film hero. The thought is not real!!!!!! They are completely different. This is the role of meditation to get really clear on this difference. Even if entry level breathing meditation we can see this difference: The breath is real. The counting and the thoughts are all made up. Ego and self belong in the counting and thoughts world not the breathing.
Now the hard work is still to come. We need let go of this mental hero. Classic examples or in humiliation. We slip and spill the cream cake down our front and the whole room is laughing. The data point is that this is quite funny. But the thought point is that "me" is being challenged. We undoubtedly have an image of "me" as calm, collected, cool, competent, a member of the group. Suddenly being a fool and being outside the group being laughed at is absolutely not what we signed up for. So we have two option: keep holding the now false image and go into stress and possibly anger as we fight back against people laughing. Or we can drop this image as easily as we dropped the plate of cream cake. The absolutely best thing to do is to enjoy the joke as well.
It can get subtle here if we want. Sometimes the humour is better when the person is visibly angry and annoyed. So we might even act being annoyed and angry to amplify the humour. But wow isn't this so much more freer and liberating that being trapped under the gaze of hostile people laughing at us.
It all hinges on this mental image we have of ourself. It is really that simple. The image and our ability to pick and up and drop that image.
If we go back to breathing meditation at any point we can re-establish what is real again. The breath is always real. It is there, it is simple, uncomplicated, it cannot be doubted. Where it fades and strengthened is all in the mind. When we ignore it then it goes completely. When we focus on it, then it comes back. If we day dream is goes. If we bring the mind back it is there again. And within the breath itself we find that it is coming and going. Best not to "think" about it as a cycle of instead focus on seeing each breath as something new. This keeps the reality and stops us falling back into thoughts. For it is in that realm of thoughts that we invent ourself and all our problems. Literally ALL our problems. Outside thoughts there are no problems, not even death, because there is no one there for them to happen to! That person, that "me', that things happen to is 100% in our heads.
Extraordinary but true! This is the most important truth in all of human life and history and knowledge.
===
So what is grasping?
Observant readers might note a problem here. Who is grasping? The problem with the word grasping, indeed any action, is that when we are looking through the lens of a "self" image:
we imagine that "I" am grasping.
SRH problem right? If you are doing the grasping how can you grasp at an image of yourself.
This circularity reveals just how deep grasping goes.
Grasping is in the realm of breathing. It happens. We can meditate on it.
But we need be mindful of the "Narcissus Flip" and not make breathing or grasping about a self. "I am breathing" and "I am grasping" are just thoughts. They should be clearly separate from actual breathing and grasping which are real.
Once we establish that grasping is real, then the order of things is correct. Grasping is real. This grasping then grabs hold of a ready made image of the self. With this image we reimagine grasping as something done by the self. Hopefully if watched in slow motion, or even just the logic of it thought about we can see that this is correct.
The "Narcissus Flip" is the carelessly turn this upside down and position a theoretical self as the start of the process. "I breath", "I grasp", "I think", "I doubt" to quote Descartes are upside down. You need to be thinking already before you can get an "I". The flip is secretly forgetting this! And in religious metaphysics that secret forgetting of who is in charge is exactly the work of no less than the Devil!
===
Does this really lead to ever lasting life as Christianity claims?
Well first how does death happen? Science will tell us that death does not really happen. Atoms, molecules, energy are just going around and around in a huge whirlpool. Death is just a step in that circuit.
What we mean by death is the sudden separation of the self model and the reality. Noticeable in a small way even when we breath (breath is not the thought of breath), but suddenly vast when we think about death. It should be fairly clear that the reason for this divorce is that we are grasping at self image as though it was real flesh and blood self. It is not: it is a celluloid hero of our mind. It is not flesh and blood, it is not living. It is a play thing of our mental playroom, a doll. Reality is the realm of the breathing. If we watch the breath we can see the continual process, which mentally we can break down into in-breath and out-breath. We can count these breaths and have 1-breath, 2-breath. Our mind can lay over this process any number of thoughts and stories. Indeed what is written here is actually a mental doll and narrative being places over an imaginary breathing. What I say here has no effect on real breathing in any way. It is purely thoughts. But it is this unreal world of thoughts where the "self' lurks trying to upend reality, place itself in imaginary charge. But all this fantasy only works in the mind: the breathing does not care. Likewise death happens and is unaffected by all the thoughts, panic, unhappiness that we may chose to bring into the picture as we imagine a self being lost. To borrow what someone said about stock prices: the body does not know who is dying!
Now one sticking point. Can't I voluntarily stop breathing, or change my breathing thus proving I am in charge.
Yes and No.
True you can hold your breath. This indeed was a meditation practice at one point in ancient time.
That is a data point.
The problem is when we try to imagine that "I" did that. It is the same as above. "I" cannot be grasping at "I." What we are doing is modelling what is going on to know about it fully. The question we should ask when we form a concept of a "I am doing" is ask "and who is doing that." You get an infinite regress if you position a self behind everything. Somewhere "selfing" cannot be done by a self. This is SRH (see earlier blog).
Modelling IS the process of knowing the world. So when we go "I just did that" this is the model. But the "I" in that model cannot be the same I as the one that did the modelling. The I that did the modelling is the modelling. If we posit a new I who did the modelling we just have a new model and so on ad infinitum.
So we understand that knowledge of the self is known by a deeper self that we only know about through the existence of this knowledge. And importantly we can't "know" that self because it is the one doing the knowing!
Descartes is not completely wrong "I do think" but that "I" is not a discrete known thing else we end up in a loop. That I is present only in the knowing. In that sense it is pointless to even try and think about it as a thing. This is Buddha's great insight of Anatta. Just drop this thinking about the self as a thing. The "self" you think you know, is really just a model of the greater self that has no form. That is what the Buddhist said to me at the very start. The Ego (modelled self) operates to protect itself often at the expense of the greater self. The "greater self" IS the knower of the Ego, and the toxic relationship is that the true knower grasps at the Ego and lives through it, thus forgetting that really it is the power here, and its behaviour and life becomes limited by believing it is the Ego. Emptiness is the concept of the true power and freedom of the knower, and dukkha, suffering, unenlightenment is the state of believing we are the Ego without realising that the believer of this is clearly not the Ego!
So we need be careful with eternal life. It is not an excuse for the Ego to carry on in fantasy after death as most Christians think, especially in America. It is the dropping of Ego so that no one remains to die. That is a state of ultimate bliss, freedom from suffering, and peace. The deeply felt goal of every true self trapped in looking at its mental reflection of an Ego.
No comments:
Post a Comment