lördag 8 mars 2014

EGO Our new Devil to fight against

New Age philosophy of Confusion



The Divider

In our Western culture we seem to be having a long history of dealing with the fight between opposites. One is good and one is bad and the thing, that leads to happiness, is to get rid of the bad one, regardless of the bad one being an idea, a spirit, a god or certain humans, animals or plants.

"Zwei Seelen wohnen, ach! in meiner Brust" 
Two souls are living in my chest! 
Goethe: Faust

C G Jung  had the same experience.  As a child, Carl Jung believed he had two personalities, which he later called the ego and the self. According to family legends, Jung's grandfather was Goethe's illegal son and Goethe's Faust influenced Jung deeply.

We can experience two opposite sides in our souls and usually we just prefer one side and ignore the other. Or we like both of them. But we can also try to figure out which one is the best side and then try to get rid of the other one (in ourselves or project it on other people and attack it).

But Jung thought about it during a whole life time and developed it into a mountain of sophisticated theories. Most people have heard about the Ego, Shadow and Persona, but as Jung´s books are difficult we usually don´t really know what these words mean.

Tolle also describes such an experience.
He was depressed and thought that he could no longer live with himself.
"If I cannot live with myself there has to be two of me, one ego and one self. And only one of them can be real."
The idea of an ego cannot have been new to him. He is German and he has been studying literature so he must know Jung´s philosophy quite well.

His intensive thinking process collapsed and then he got filled with inner peace and during some years he was just walking around feeling high and happy. He had stopped identifying with his thinking and then his medicine to humanity is that other people should also get rid of this thinking that builds up our ego. He seems to be taking for granted that thoughts are always negative.

Does he not know that some people have a positive thinking? The inner voice is not negative for everyone just because it was so for him. People have different kinds of thoughts.

He says that the "ego" is the thinking that we identify with,
When Tolle says ego he seams to mean a mixture that is made up from mental identificaton on material concepts within time and space, combined with problems and our defence instinct.

.............................

He talks about being aware in the present and if I get down from his philosophical thoughts and words about reality and look at the collective present here and now I discover the effects of the teachings about the bad ego. 
The effect cannot be seen in his writing because it is not there, it is a behaviour that has started to flourish among some people who seem to have concentrated mainly on the bad ego. 
When his words about the ego have sunk down to the pavement they seem to have got perverted into a new story, which Tolle had maybe not intended.
He says a lot of good things about presence and identifications, but it is the concept of Ego that gets twisted. People do not talk about how they have managed to live in the present moment, they talk about other peoples´egos.

Freud, Jung and Tolle did not intend to give people a new devil to fight against but there are other people who turn the idea into a tool that is used in the mental fighting about what is right and what is wrong and who is the good one and who is not.
Any kind of such fighting is what Tolle would call "ego", but if you have to get away from your ego there is already a conflict in this statement, an inner division.
A mental duality is born and to fullfill the demands of your ego you have to make sure that you are on the right side in this fight between right and wrong.
And the result is that people judge others and accuse them of "having an ego" to feel that they themselves are on the right side. Nobody wants to be the outcast.

Then other people show up on the stage and say:
 "Hey! Stop fighting and be friend with your ego!"

....................................

It has always been in this way: first there was a spiritual teacher who wanted to make people aware of our inner peace and how to reach it, talking about the duality between the good and the bad side of us, the desired and the undesired side.
But instead of reaching this peace, some people start fighting about it with the idea of the bad side being an enemy that should be taken away. In time the fighting can grow and take a new form.

As soon as we focus on getting rid of the bad side it starts growing and turns into an enemy and then our defence mechanisms are activated and more people get more ideas about it, until the block of information is so big that it can form a whole university course.

The word Devil once became the personification of evil, 
a supernatural entity that we got into war with
because it was tempting us to sin.
and to evil actions.

Devil means “the one who divides”.

We feel divided in two parts, one depressed and one happy, one low and one high, one right and one wrong, and then we get the bright idea of getting rid of “the thing that divides”us from our happiness.
It has to be taken away from us, and as it is an undesired part of us it becomes what Jung calls The Shadow, which we then project on to others and the war starts and people get divided into the ones who are on the right path and the ones who are on the sinister path.
Earlier we should get rid of The Divider, who also himself became the bad part in a religious division, and now we should get rid of the Ego, the inner bad side in a psychological division.
In this way The Devil and The Ego have become psychologically the same thing.

But such a division concept is like a spiritual sword for those who like to “fight for God” (any kind of fight gives energy, and to fight for the right must be right) and their Shadow Projections turn the accused people into frustrated victims, who just get the feeling of not having the right to be themselves.
.......................................

We have decided that the Devil does not exist so his chair is empty. 

We don´t have this old figure to project on others , so we can invent a new concept, a new word, which people can be accused of "having", like having formed a pact with or got possessed by or mislead by.
We can invent a psychological concept that has to be killed or eliminated.
It has to be something that we do not fully understand, like the Devil in the old days, so the concept “Ego” is perfect for this. We don´t really know what it is and it is so tricky that some even say that it does not exist!

You have an ego? 
Oh... then you are in trouble! 
But I can help you!

That is a common trick of a black magician (or a psychopath), who first scares you and then tells you that he is the one who can help you, because he is the expert of a concept that you do not understand.
Then you get lost in his loving arms!

You have another opinion than I have?
Hahaaa! That is just your ego!!!!

Tolle does not mean to create trouble, but his "ego" being described as something bad "to get away from" gives this opportunity to other people to use this "ego" in the same way as old religion used the word "devil", which became a label that could be put on people, by those who wanted to put them down or get rid of them.
........................................

In ancient times people were accused of being in a partnership with the Devil and later it developed into a systematic killing of ”those people that were under the spell of evil”. The idea had been taken over by a collective defence.

From this we should have learned not to give people a duality to fight about, but... if one behaviour is better there has to be another which is undesired. It is maybe difficult to talk about "the good" without also creating "the bad".
Maybe the Buddhists are the ones who have succeeded in getting behind this problem.

Today many people get a feeling of just being harassed by other peoples´ statements that they ”have an ego” as soon as they claim something. They feel accused of not being ”cosmic enough” to be of any value, so the statement ”that is your ego” is of course quite a perfect tool when it comes to put someone else down.

What you say then, “behind the words”, is that you are so highly developed that you can make this judgment: you can tell the other person that he or she is actually ”under the spell of evil” and has to change. Of the two you are the best one.
To hint that someone else is acting “from his ego” is also what could be called an “ego projection” in New Age terms (which would be Jung´s shadow projection.)

This ego is the part of you that likes to cast a judgement on someone and it is the part of you that likes to win in a conflict.

And then, to show your own ”absence of ego” you ad a statement that proves that you are a very humble and loving person. You might ad: 

“Of course, I also have an ego, 
but I do what I can to get over it.... 
Peace be with you! 
I love you!”
Then you are on the safe side.

This is too tricky for most people and they cannot find out what it is about. There is just a remaining feeling that “something is wrong” and there is no chance to start arguing about it, because any comment or protest would just show “your dependency on your ego, which wants to fight and get big” or it would show that “you are in your mind”, which is also supposed to be totally wrong and another thing that you risk to be accused of.

You have an opinion? You say something? You study to get a good job? You are interested in making something better? You complain about something? You protest against something?

Oh... that is your ego!!! 
You are puffed up, 
you want to be“somebody”  

= you are on the wrong path!

The idea from this New Age religion is that your "ego" is the part of you that gives you a need to be in control, to judge others and to defend yourself and to be better than others.
Do not claim anything that is outside of the common and accepted norms! Remain where you are and preferably take two steps back to show how humble you are!

And... if you do't want to do anything you can always claim that any material action just comes from the ego! People will get angry, but then you can claim that their objections just come from their ego!
They will not easily know what to answer.

.........................................

There is in reality no precise, psychological concept with the name of “ego” that all people agree upon. Freud wrote about “das Ich” (the I), but the translator changed it into “the Ego” when he translated into English and by doing so he gave it a new meaning, which was not intended with “das Ich”.
The Latin Ego is emphasized, which the German Ich is not, so in the English world the ego became the bad ego, while for Jung it was also the good ego: your center of consciousness (whatever you were conscious about.)

Then I can only guess that the good ego was forgotten among ordinary people in the English world, while the bad ego developed when philosophical persons explained and developed the idea that we have a bad ego. The bad ego got an existence of it´s own when deprived of the good ego. A new entity was created.
The word ego is also so similar to egoism so we cannot see if there is a difference in the meaning. We just unconsciously take for granted that it is the same.
This personal pronoun has become a noun and is talked about as if it was a "thing".

.................................

As Tolle is German and has been studying literature he must know Freud and Jung. So why does he only mention the negative ego and not the positive ego, that Jung talked about, which was the needed distinction from the group to develop into an individual who had the ability to find himself.

When Jung spoke about “das Ich” (I, ego) 
he meant that conscious part of you 
that no longer obeys to the conformity of society.
He spoke of the part of you 
that makes you step out of that 
and become an individual 
who sets out to find himself 
and the Higher Self.

“Ego” is the part of you that makes it possible and here we have the I on the right path.

 When the ego has done it´s job you don´t need it to be so active anymore. The I still exists, but without armour.
Individual means undivided.

The New Age  sees the word “ego” only in the sense of "negative ego" which is something that we need to get rid of.

New Age gurus are saying this:


The Ego, however, is not who you really are. The ego is your self-image; it is your social mask; it is the role you are playing. Your social mask thrives on approval. It wants control, and it is sustained by power, because it lives in fear.
Deepak Chopra

Your social mask is what Jung calls Persona

One way to think about ego is as a protective heavy shell, such as the kind some animals have, like a big beetle. This protective shell works like armor to cut you off from other people and the outside world. What I mean by shell is a sense of separation: Here's me and there's the rest of the universe and other people. The ego likes to emphasize the "otherness" of others.
This sense of separation is an intrinsic part of the ego.
Tolle

What Tolle calls Ego is what Jung calls Counterego or Shadow .
What Tolle calls ego also sounds like the "left brain".
What Tolle calls ego is also the defence instinct.

"Ego" becomes, in practical life, similar to the old Devil and you will get into that fight like being a modern Don Quijote.

"Your ego" will start fixing your mask and show people that you are one of those humble, cosmic and loving persons that are so much developed that they do not have any terrible ego any longer.

You are fighting to gain recognition by showing that you are not fighting. It is the paradox of fighting to become a piece guru.
..............................

This is how many people do when they want to make a career, at least within the New Age;
they take a concept that another person has made known to the big public and then they either change the word and keep the content, or they change the content and keep the word.
Tolle and Chopra have made both: They have taken the word “ego” from translations of Freud and Jung and the content from the old, Eastern, spiritual traditions and then they just have put it together and sold it, without really checking up on the words.

I don´t deny Tolle´s experience, it sounds as if it was his "left brain" that suddenly got offline from having been overloaded with negative thinking (as he describes).
A  brain crash is not what Jung meant with I (das Ich) and it is not what Indian philosophy meant with I (aham), but it can be what they mean with illumination.

What other people call left brain seems to be what Tolle calls ego, as he talks about silencing the inner voice, and he also describes a sudden  experience that seems to be what Jill Bolte Taylor calls  right brain

He probably already had a strong ego (in the sense of Jung´s theory), because the "left brain" is what you handle language with.
That´s why he could make a constructive use of an ego crash and the same goes for Jill Bolte Taylor.
They had already come to that level of individuation.

If a person with a weak ego gets an ego crash he might just end up in a psychiatric clinic.


.......................................

The one who coined the expression “the ego” was Freud´s translator James Strachey.

The psychologist Bettelheim meant that “anyone who reads Freud only in Strachey’s English translation cannot understand Freud's concern with man’s soul.
“Strachey’s translation was also an act of interpretation and it has not been hard to find spots where he went astray.”
The most 'obvious flaw in this translation was the substitution of esoteric neologisms for the plain German terms Freud preferred', so that for example his "I" and his "It"  (das Ich und das Es) become the Ego and the Id.

.......................................

The word "I" cannot be used as an indication for something that you should get rid of, because it is you. It is a paradox and we feel that "something is wrong".
When the mystic says. “I am divine love” he uses the word I (aham).
If we use the word ego to indicate the I on the wrong path it would be OK if the I on the right path was also mentioned and explained at the same time (as Jung did). It is not a matter of being I or not being I - it is a matter of my identification = the identification of I.

Using the word I (ego) to indicate only something that you should get rid of creates a language that gives you a problem because it demands from you that you should deny yourself, because ego is used also to indicate aspects of the true ego. 
You are not allowed to be an individual because that is selfish.

And maybe that is what society wants from us:
You should continue to be an obedient part of the collective union, like in communism. As soon as you protest against anything you'd better shut your mouth because you are just possessed by your ego. 

The Power always wanted to have a silent population that remains within the conformity.


......................................

Ego, I, ich, jag, aham: that is your center. It is not something that belongs to you – you are your center.
But this center can be sick or healthy, but Tolle, Chopra &Co talk about the sick ego, which they call ego.
Jung talked about a healthy ego and it´s true function towards your higher Self.

Tolle´s “ego”(=how it is perceived by people) is desirable to Society, because people in power do not want to have any more individual whistleblowers. It is not the first time they use religion to bind people.
Those people who have a sick and blown up ego will not listen to Tolle, but sensitive New Age-people, who are on the first steps towards self-realization, will get pushed back by the idea that they do not have the right to be themselves as individuals (because that would be egoistic and anti-cosmic).

We label and “diagnose” others and ourselves with the slang versions of psychological terms that we have no deeper understanding of.

In Sanskrit you can use “Aham” (I) to indicate a union with the highest where you no longer identifies with your body or your material existence. The “I” is still there.

In BhagavadGita I do not find the word Aham (I) in the sense of “the false ego”. The book uses the word “ahankara” for that.  Aham is used in the positive sense of the true and eternal core: Aham prema.

Your ego forms a union with the object for your identification.

Aham Brahmasmi = I am Brahman, I am Spirit Soul.

….............................

False ego means accepting this body as oneself. When one understands that he is not his body and is spirit soul, he comes to his real ego. Ego is there. 
Prabhupada

He uses the word ego in the same way as Jung uses “das Ich”. (He must have had some German friends who could explain this to him!)

"The key, again, in the Buddhist sense, is not dissolving but developing the ego into a more flexible and permeable ego. This is considered a strong ego, capable of both surrender and function. The weak ego is the rigid, defensive one."
Robert Thurman
Jey Tsong Khapa Professor of Indo- Tibetan Studies at Columbia University, New York City

He also seems to know what Jung meant.

"There is no 'thing' to let go of, but a concept, an idea of an ego that burdens us. As soon as we posit a 'thing' to let go of, we're in trouble. We need to change our view of reality, not attack a nonexistent entity."
Sharon Salzberg
Vipassana Teacher

She looks at how people are functioning: creating an enemy that they then have to fight against, the effect that this anti-ego-teaching can have on ordinary people with low self esteem, who just end up in a conflict from it.
To create an enemy that you then fight to get rid of...




There are many methods for developing the higher side of your inner world and they are often called "developing the right brain".

The left brain makes you effective, 
but also isolated and depressed, 
while the right brain makes you feel 
united with everything and happy.

 Left-brained and right-brained are two concepts that we use to indicate two ways of thinking and perceiving our reality. Science claims that we use both sides of the brain whatever we do, but maybe it just means that science has not yet found the real managers of our two different ways of thinking.
Maybe it is that we connect to different frequencies, but these methods would work in any case.
We can still use this terminology because it works, even if we cannot yet exactly nail down how the brain works.
Ego is also a terminology for something that we cannot find out exactly where it is, not even if it exists..

INNER CHILD


If a trigger brings up frustrations and anger it is not so good to just call it "ego" and push it away.
It is also called The Wounded Inner Child and this "inner entity" needs to be seen. It needs attention and recognition and healing of old forgotten memories.

Jung also talked about making the unconscious conscious.