Dechristo Posted July 21, 2005 Posted July 21, 2005 Transcendent It all begins from within by killing the ego. As long as you are riding in your biological vehicle (with its incessant demands for comfort and pleasure) and responding to the inherent demands for rational (cause & effect) thinking [with its intrinsic base of "what do I think is the best thing (i.e., the best thing to help others)], there will be no absence of ego. IMO, "it all begins from within" by learning the ego's identity and your relationship to it. Quote
SemoreJugs Posted July 21, 2005 Posted July 21, 2005 (edited) I should have been more concise. Weakness and humblesness (by which I mean egolessness) do not have to be intertwined. I agree, often they are. But they do not have an intrisic quality of togetherness. Granted, the ego, or self-seving mind, will always be present. It is nescessary for self preservation. When I said "kill the ego", I should have said master the ego. Control it rather than be controlled by it. Always be aware of it. I agree, power or energy is something that flows thru everything. A being, like Ghandi, can learn how to harness this power. Yes, a permission is required to relinquish power to another entity, often the one giving permission is not even aware that they are giving their power over to something else (ie an angry mob or peaceful protesters). Accordingly, the mob ruled by fear is less likely to be able to make conscious decisions. They are acting on more primal forces whereas peaceful protesters are working from the "higher" mind and ideals and are thus more likely to be conscious of their decisions. Don't you find it odd that you refer to peaceful men using peaceful measures against oppression, but then use a violent, self-destructive image as a starting point? Again, killing was a poor metahphor. Maybe that word choice reveals something about myself? Thanks for the insight! I can think of some, and will be happy to get into history in a bit. I'm sure there are a few, but no generalization lacks exceptions. What I am talking about is an overarching pattern. But I'd love to be educated on heroic tyrants. But what comes to mind right now is that we all end up in an earthen hole--egomaniacs and humble leaders. All of us are equal in that. how very true, but at least the humble leader has improved the lot of himself and mankind and can die with a smile on his face and a full heart. Edited July 21, 2005 by SemoreJugs Quote
archenemy Posted July 21, 2005 Posted July 21, 2005 I should have been more concise. Weakness and humblesness (by which I mean egolessness) do not have to be intertwined. I agree, often they are. But they do not have an intrisic quality of togetherness. Everything has the intrinsic quality of togetherness. Granted, the ego, or self-seving mind, will always be present. It is nescessary for self preservation. When I said "kill the ego", I should have said master the ego. Control it rather than be controlled by it. Always be aware of it. Domination versus violence? I don't know if I am convinced that would be better. And what masters the self other than the self? The result could simply be a larger, bifurcated self. And to insist on being vigilantly aware of the self is hardly selfless, no? I agree, power or energy is something that flows thru everything. A being, like Ghandi, can learn how to harness this power. Yes, a permission is required to relinquish power to another entity, If you honestly believe that power flows through everything, then one person need not harness (capture) it than another need give it away. It is omnipresent, perhaps just manifesting in different ways. often the one giving permission is not even aware that they are giving their power over to something else (ie an angry mob or peaceful protesters). If you have ever been caught up in a mob, you know right away that you are leaving your indivduality out of the equation. It is a strange, frightening, exhilerating experience. Accordingly, the mob ruled by fear is less likely to be able to make conscious decisions. They are acting on more primal forces whereas peaceful protesters are working from the "higher" mind and ideals and are thus more likely to be conscious of their decisions. You are assuming that a concious decision of the mind is higher than a reactive one of the gut. People are able to respond from the gut and throw themselves on a grenade to save others. Protesters could come to an ideal that is simply unacceptable to the rest of us. I can think of some, and will be happy to get into history in a bit. I'm sure there are a few, but no generalization lacks exceptions. What I am talking about is an overarching pattern. But I'd love to be educated on heroic tyrants. I believe you mentioned ego-driven leaders going down in a blaze of glory, and that is what I responded to. Heros and tyrants are classes unto themselves. But what comes to mind right now is that we all end up in an earthen hole--egomaniacs and humble leaders. All of us are equal in that. how very true, but at least the humble leader has improved the lot of himself and mankind and can die with a smile on his face and a full heart. And I assume this would cause him to lose his humbleness at the very moment it matters the most. Quote
Buckaroo Posted August 2, 2005 Posted August 2, 2005 Apologies then, don't know what got into me, maybe the full moon. Anyway was only kidding. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.