I just read a great article in the Yoga Journal.
Sophisticated Ego by Sally Kempton.
I really felt that Sally captured the essence, or lack there of, ego in this article. Here is a great little snippet
Om Sanskrit the word for ego is ahamkara, which means "the I maker" (kind of like Mentos the fresh maker) Ego differentiates itself amon the mass of sensations that come your way and tell you that a particular experience belongs to the energy bundle you call "me"
The energy bundle you call me. What an intriguing concept. I pondered on this concept. I quickly took a look at my surroundings and said the energy bundle of me, okay what around me here is me? good question- everything really, by seeing I identify with things. In order to see my optical recepters have to take in the light energy that those things reflect. This energy becomes a part of "my" energy bundle. Now I could run this through an analysis by Nagarjuna and swiftly the emptiness of me, the sight and the object of that site quickly comes to pass. But lets stick on a conventional level for a moment. The energy bundle I call me. When I am next to another person, my aura will overlap, mess and sometimes blend with their aura especially when centered in love. So where is my energy bundle? My energy bundle is their energy bundle, what can I call me.
Sally goes on to say that sometimes the ego is not inclusive enough in its realm of what it identifies itself with. This is definately something to think on...
A small meditation is included in the article, the "I am" meditation. Not a bad one, but in my opinion it asks one to think a little bit much. I much prefer the Kundalini Meditation "I am, I am" I am what I am it does not allow for your ego to start thowing terms of attachment into the mix.
If ya say it long enough, you don't even know what you are saying anymore- I am, I am I am, I am I am, I am I am, I am I am, I am I am, I am I am, I am I am, I am I am, I am I am, I am
Technorati Tags- New Age