The two types of "knowing" most spiritual paths seem to identify are intellect and intuitive. Many spiritual circles seem to point to the intellect or mind as bound up with ego. Are we then saying that the intuitive is separate from the mind? (the mind being the seat of the intellect and the seat of "self") Or is intuitive "knowing" just another form or layer of ego, but less reliant on sensory perception? And maybe more attuned to other ways of knowing?
I have heard theories which place the intuitive understanding as within the whole body and even on a cellular level. That may be from where the intuitive originates but do we not experience intuitive knowledge in the mind? Could we not, in fact, say that all "experience" is of the mind, since clearly we identify with the mind as "self," much more than the body (although the body is seen as a part of "self," the mind is more quintessentially the "I am that" of awareness). Could we not say that if all experience is of the mind and the mind is ego, awakening is of the ego? Possibly we need to move away from this tired old worn out label of "ego."
So yes, perhaps the ego is allowing transformation. In fact, I tend to feel that it must be that way.
What is the ego? Is it simply a "package of beliefs" that I invest in as my"self"? In fact isn't it merely my belief in that I am something as opposed to nothing, since it is the nothing that I fear which caused me to form a "self" or ego? Therefore, the very idea of transcending the ego seems to me absurd since all my beliefs are ego, good and bad. The most I can do, if I am so spiritually inclined, is to transform the ego in order to align my beliefs with the intuitive, which may be a deeper more esoteric understanding of self and world, yet it is still ego. This may then be an arranging of 'conditions' so as to allow for revelation/realization/enlightenment, etc, etc. But of myself I cannot in any way facilitate awakening since I am ego and not to be ego is not to exist, or pure nihilism.
I can never be NOT be an ego even in my deepest spiritual practices an ego must be the practitioner. Although the ego seeks to transcend itself it cannot negate itself no matter how hard it may try since that would be non-existence. I could say, "but my true self is not an ego." But who is saying that? The ego seeking true self?
It's like a vicious circle in which the ego tries to essentially consume itself but finds that it can only get so far since it is both the prey and the predator.
The practice of identifying and isolating and then, essentially, villifying an aspect of self or, in fact, self in toto, since the ego is the self. Here is a part of the whole that I must in some way break with, transcend, seek other then, be other then, move away from, etc, etc. Awareness is the whole, but the moment a "part" is differentiated as undesirable in any slight or subtle way, the whole is LOST.
The problem is the more we attempt to "transcend," the more we solidly we press ourself down into it and become more deeply invested in IT (and this seems to occur on subconscious and unconscious levels - I believe many are unaware of their role in this ego maintenance). Therefore, all these "experiences" that we call "awakening" are merely wonderful flashes of light and sound (and whatever else) signifying movement along the path, but not full awakening, to God. How can that happen, when you have identified a "part" that YOU have decided is unwelcome? Does God or Universal Source not accept ALL of you?
We may try desparately to be pleasant to the ego/self and thus limit our seeing it as unworthy, but in our efforts to transcend IT, we are positing an ultimate desire to end its "life." No matter how we choose to describe our endeavor to awaken, we are essentially an ego/self seeking to be other then what IT is.
This is the antithesis of oneness and unity that is of Source Mind or God. Advocating that "you are not your ego" is easily incorporated into "egoness" and the ego enjoys transcendent processes that simply allow it to essentially assume other "forms" of itself.
Make no mistake, in seeking to transcend the ego you have consciously and unconsciously determined it is NOT desirable to you and what you resist, must persist. You may enjoy the seemingly transcendental experiences of this path, but totally transcend you will NOT.
Many may state that you should still find worthiness in the ego in your attempts at transcending IT. However, the differentiation has been made and thus, pretending to love the ego while trying to transcend the ego is inauthentic and the ego knows this and easily rolls with it.
Accept that you are an ego and love IT, not some pseudo-love, but truly love your ego (past, present and future) and in so doing, seek to transform its essence and not transcend its presence. Embrace it as the whole and the totality of perfect peace.
Do not in any way villify or seek to separate from parts of the whole since as such the whole will elude you entirely. In this love of "wholeness," transformation is indeed available to wholeness but only as wholeness. No need to differentiate or judge since that only presumes "parts" and thus parts are what you will continue to experience.
Yet, in the end my words are useless and in any path to God/Source you will need to find your own way by relying on "self" and nothing else.
0 comments:
Post a Comment