Charity and the Ego

i agree
the ego is a guardian which has a tendancy to turn into a guard
we ARE our egos
"ego" is the word that means "me"

its just that contextually we tend to use the word when we want to stress the UNHEALTHILY selfish elements of our ego

its all just words but the words have meanings and i use these words:
theres a healthy selfish -like trusting in ones worth and refusing to be dominated or sidetracked from ones purpose

and theres an unhealthy selfish ego
which realy at the heart of it is an ego that doesnt know its own worth or its purpose
and so not only feels compelled to prove and defend itself unnecessarily
but is also vulnerable to being dominated or manipulated and sidetracked

because its not really pursuing its purpose
its pursuing its own illusion of proving itself

we all have the tendancy to slip in back and forth between the two

I liked Steamboats first post, and quite agree...

I am my ego too... We are not "the collective" (Borg?)

Just can't let it get out of control...

I use orange letters in my posts, as a nod to my ego... But, also because when I'm zoomed out on my phone, my posts stand out, lol...

We just mustn't let it be in control....

I'm not a wealthy person by any means, but I know I have it a lot better than most in this world. My job allows me to support a number of charities by partnering with them for our radio station events to raise funds and spread their message to a half million people who listen on a weekly basis. Does that make me feel good? Absolutely! And I'm okay with that. The money that has been raised and the messages being delivered have helped to make my community and my world a better place. A child with cancer got to visit his favorite professional baseball player. An underfed child gets a free breakfast at his school every morning. Researches seeking to cure leukemia were funded. A small community airport was reopened. Awareness was raised about domestic violence. A veteran and his family were given a home. I may not be able to write a giant check, but I give of my time and my talent to do what I can to make these things happen. These are good things, and I got to play a part in them. No shame in my game.

the idea of jedi service as it relates to charity?

In the sense of Picasso's comment "Anything you can imagine, is real" - clearly the ego exists, its an inherent part of our constructed reality. But we create it. We choose to create it - whether its part of our evolutionary survival imperative, or not.

The Anglican vicar that baptised my youngest son told us that he viewed this differentiation as the "original sin". I asked him if he was sure he wasn't actually Hindu . The duality of me and you, as separate, is fictitious. It seems disarmingly real - but there is only one self. Its all Brahman playing his/her different persona. I'm happy to play the part (or for my part to be played) - and I'm enthralled by the plot of the play. But if you want to talk "reality" - are we talking about the performance or the green room behind the stage?

Nobody should like a member of the cast who rips off his mask in the middle of the performance and says "Hang on audience - you may as well just walk out. This isn't actually real - we're all just acting. I quit". It does completely spoil the play. But if you really want to talk reality, that's what somebody needs to do. If you can't do that here in the Temple then I'm not sure where you can. But fair play - there's no question - it does spoil the play.

I'm a newbie here - so forgive me - I'm not familiar with the rules: Are we in the green room or are we on stage here?

*leary cast member shuts up, pulls on mask and gets back in character* - the Tony for best supporting actor may escape him again this year

Perhaps all feelings are 'good' when viewed from the appropriate vantage? Sorry to take it back to intention, but ones intent probably matters to how one incorporates behaviour into their lives.

I was reading this and wondering why I always feel sad when I give to charity. All I could come up with is that compassion requires empathy and I was focusing too much on the suffering of the recipients. Could that be the manifestation of non-egotistical charity? From that baseline then any positive experience of self (as a result of giving) could be approached in more manageable/useful terms - instead of using that positive feeling as the reward and cause for giving.

what if the ancient vedantists decided that there was no way to understand what the universe is
or what we are
but that we all need a frame of reference to begin with
and considered the idea of brahma
and especially maya
as being a lighthearted, sophisticated, and most especially
a very functional beginning frame of reference
for the idea that real wisdom is to be free from any single rigid interpretation

Thanks OB1 - I suspect you are right. Stretching the metaphor too far might cause it to snap - and talking about it in the way I was above is not helpful! Certainly buddhists tend not to even entertain the question of what the universe is - its not a "sensible" question from their perspective, because there probably isn't a "sensible" answer.

Back to charity perhaps, and Alexandre's suggestion that we should give it away like we never owned it in the first place. I don't remember where I read it, but people attaching to the notion of private property, or ownership of anything are a bit like dog fleas arguing over which bit if the dog they own. It may seem important to the fleas, but the reality is just the dog.

Whether ego is "real" or "fictional" we are all in this (maya) together. If my left hand has a thorn in it, my right hand doesn't ignore it, it doesn't feel compassion for it - it just gets in there and pulls the thorn out as best it can. The right hand doesn't feel good or bad about this, and neither does the left hand. Its just a completely, natural, instinctive action. Its a clunky metaphor but perhaps that's what "helping" should be like. As Adder says from his experience, perhaps the meaning of "charity" comes with too much baggage today.

I must have heard 1 Corinthians 13 read more than a dozen times at various weddings, with the modern translation: Love is this, love is that . . .
I never realised that the original english translation doesn't use the word "love" it uses the word "charity". Charity isn't the act of giving or helping - its spontaneous, selfless love:
verse 3: "And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing"
Again - its clunky language - but maybe there's something in this.

I like this thread. There are some great comments being bandied around.

As I read, I couldn't help but summarize by your thoughts...

There is a Light Side and Dark Side to the Ego. We are our Ego, but how we use it makes it good or bad, right or wrong, healthy or degrading.

It is kind of like the debate in an old thread about the Force not being Light or Dark, but it is a reflection of how you use the Force in your life.


Edit: As for the Thank You button, it would be nice to have a whole slew of buttons...Thank You, I agree, I disagree, Your Welcome, Shut the F^$ up, Keep talking Girl, and the all inclusive...ARE YOU NUTS! :evil: :whistle:

Phortis Nespin wrote: and the all inclusive...ARE YOU NUTS! :evil: :whistle:

I vote for this one! :silly: