Friday, May 25, 2007

EGO-STATES: “LOVE” OR “EGO,” BUT NOT BOTH (A Continuing Series on Ego-States), Part Six, The Conclusion

Table of Contents

Today's Considerations
Recent Posts and Archives
Tools for Realization
Author's eBooks
Author's Paperback Books
Free eBooks
FROM A SITE VISITOR: So the whole problem really begins with ego, right? Sam (PS Thanks for the blog site.)

F.: This series has discussed the price of being trapped in ego-states by focusing on a man and woman who for twenty years have been play-acting with each other, assuming phony roles, saying phony words, and living phony lives on the stage of The Drama of the Lie. They are not the exception in this culture or in most other cultures.
What is most insane-like among the non-Realized is the fact that they become so embroiled in their roles—and so embroiled in the play that they are writing and re-writing every day—that they eventually take their roles and games and play-acting to be the real. Once they are convinced that their play is “their world,” then when the curtain falls on that play—as it surely will—they are so traumatized by the collapsing of "their world" that they often contemplate suicide or murder or both. (The woman in this series wants to die because her husband is leaving. Another woman said this week that she wants to die because her husband died. Either way, that which they assumed would last forever...did not. Is grief natural? Yes. Are grief-inspired murder and suicide natural? No, though they are becoming far more "typical.")

The connection between the assumption of ego-states and the “problems in personal relationships” has been illustrated. Having accepted the culture’s lies that they are “two,” persons who take themselves to be “a couple” can light all of the “Unity Candles” that they want but that symbolic act (which is done quickly and then forgotten as quickly) can never replace Realization which alone leads to a full understanding of “not two.” Thus, they will develop personas and they will try to relate and they will never see the double lie that the terms “personal” and “relationships” point to.

Is that to say that dating and marriage and establishment of households are to be avoided? Of course not. It is to say that only misery and suffering can follow when persons become programmed and conditioned and enculturated in a way that leads them to believe that the temporary can be forever. The relative existence is marked with such chaos and change and fluctuation that to expect any phase or stage to last forever is delusional, but it is that very belief which leads many persons to those suidical or homicidal thoughts that come when assumed personas in assumed relationships eventually end.
And there are stages in the ever-changing realm of the relative. Shakespeare spoke of “Seven Stages.” Some Eastern philosophies speak of “Three Stages” (student-householder-forest dweller) and some speak of “Five Stages” (Programming, Accumulation, Self-inquiry, Realization, and De-accumulation).

Shakespeare said that “All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players. They have their exits and their entrances, and one man in his time plays many parts, his acts being seven ages.” He listed the infant stage, the student stage, the lover stage, the fighter stage, and—before returning to the childish stage during advanced age—there are the stages of introspection and consideration which can lead to enlightenment that can, in turn, end the fighting and lead to relaxing and taking it easy, no matter what happens.

Easterners who discuss "Three Stages" list the student stage, the householder stage, and the forest dweller stage. In the first stage, the “tools” required for meeting the basic necessities of the relative existence are accumulated. In the second stage, accumulating happens at an accelerated pace (including a job, a spouse, a home, furnishings, children, necessities, luxuries, etc.). Most persons fixate at that stage and never reach the third stage, the “forest dweller” stage.

That third stage has been entered literally by many who abandon all material possessions and retreat to the woods for contemplation and considerations that can lead to enlightenment. Henry David Thoreau was one of the few U.S. citizens in his day to enter that third stage that has its roots in Eastern philosophy. Moving to Walden Pond, he said, “I went to the woods because I wished to live deliberately, to front only the essential facts of life, and see if I could not learn what it had to teach, and not, when I came to die, discover that I had not lived.” Yesterday, the pointer was offered that the wife (who is now suicidal because she is losing her primary label) has not realized the point offered by Advaita and adumbrated by Thoreau: separated from Self, she has come to die without discovering that she has not yet lived.

To come to the essential understandings via the “forest dweller stage,” however, does not require that one literally go to the woods (though time in “re-treat” for “re-creation” can be most effective). Furthermore, most Advaita teachers would never encourage anyone who might be wanting to skip from stage one to stage three. Maharaj did not offer the teachings to his children because they had to move into the householder stage and “earn a living.” Exposure to the Teachings at too early an age can prove detrimental to movement through each of the stages, he pointed out.

That said, there is no age requirement for transitioning beyond the householder stage and into the forest dweller stage since one need not literally leave family and possessions behind in order for enlightenment to happen. Most persons, however, will fixate in the second stage and never seek the understanding available via the third stage. As a result of that fixation, they will live with the constant fluctuations between “good times” and “bad times” and all of the instability that comes with the adoption of ego-states that are generated while in the householder stage. Eventually, those roles will either be taken away traumatically or can be forfeited with pleasure. That is a key consideration in this discussion.

The pointer was offered yesterday that “Realization, which allows for AS IF living, is a pre-emptive strike against that which will eventually strike all persons absorbed in ego-states.” AS IF living means that freedom from the “mind” and “personality” has happened, so freedom from both self-absorption and even SELF-absorption has happened. Even freedom from SELF-absorption? Yes. Among the Realized, the relative existence is not burdened with having to focus on any concepts or any teachings or even on “The True Self.” If the teachings happen to be shared post-Realization, that generally accounts for a small portion of a day’s activities. Nothing is obsessed over, including Advaita, once Full Realization happens.

Consider again the pointer that was offered yesterday:

The Realized merely see all exactly as it is yet still live in a contented, AS IF fashion that allows peace to happen whether “in relationship” or not, whether “in love” or not, or whether “married” or not. The Realized are driven by nothing, including relative desires, relative fears, or relative perceptions of need. That is never the case with persons (the non-Realized). Total freedom can happen, no matter what your circumstances might be.

Are you ready to be free? CASTING LIGHT ON THE DARK SIDE OF REALTIONSHIPS identifies the sources of problems in “relationships” and offers solutions that can be applied during the remaining manifestation of the consciousness. FROM THE I TO THE ABSOLUTE is a guide through the steps that can lead to total freedom. The ways and the means are available. May your “journey” begin now (or continue now) and move promptly to its end in order that freedom from all things relative might be transitioned so that You can abide as the Absolute and know absolute peace and absolute freedom...now. Please enter the silence of contemplation.

  • Click FROM THE I TO THE ABSOLUTE (A Seven-Step Journey to Reality)
  • Recent Posts and Archives