↗ Live site
Fostering study of The Urantia Book
and dissemination of its teachings
EN
Preview: a read-only copy of the forum. To post or reply, use the current forum.

What is the Ego

43 posts · 5 participants · started Aug 14, 2014, 1:58 AM

  1. TUBParticipant
    Aug 14, 2014, 1:58 AM

    1229.7) 112:2.20 The material self, the ego-entity of human identity, is dependent during the physical life on the continuing function of the material life vehicle, on the continued existence of the unbalanced equilibrium of energies and intellect which, on Urantia, has been given the name life.

    According to this quote the ego is the material self. Which makes sense considering the definition of Ego means self.

    This is the definition of ego I took from Dictionary.com.

    1.

    the “I” or self of any person; a person as thinking, feeling, and willing, and distinguishing itself from the selves of others and from objects of its thought.
    So if we go back and look at those papers that talk about an alter-ego, we get a totally different perspective. A lot of readers read those papers thinking the authors must be mistaken because to them an ego is something bad. Technically what is bad is an egotism. That is completely different than just the ego.
     
    (997.3)91:3.5 Aside from all that is superself in the experience of praying, it should be remembered that ethical prayer is a splendid way to elevate one’s ego and reinforce the self for better living and higher attainment. Prayer induces the human ego to look both ways for help: for material aid to the subconscious reservoir of mortal experience, for inspiration and guidance to the superconscious borders of the contact of the material with the spiritual, with the Mystery Monitor.
    So an alter-ego must just mean alter-self.
  2. ReaderParticipant
    Aug 14, 2014, 4:17 AM

    Interesting, Scott, I needed this just now, thanks.

    Regarding your first quote, I hope you will agree that the authors are differentiating this material ego from the much different, wholly new “selfhood of survival value” referenced in the latter part of the same paragraph (not quoted). What I am saying is that the authors may not mean for us to think of the surviving personality as if it were merely a material ‘ego’ which has ‘grown up.’

    That is, I would like to think we are NOT being asked to use the term ‘ego’ in this paragraph as if it were an early developmental stage leading ‘naturally’ to the higher self they are talking about in the same paragraph. [NOTE important added word capitalized].

    Of course this ‘ego’ or material identity, is a stage of life, but I would like to think it is one which is not directly continuous with the veritable ‘new being’ we see by the time the personality of survival status, spoken of in the latter part of the paragraph, has emerged on the Godward side of life (as the ‘new man’ or the one not merely born again but literally born from above.)

    To put it another way, I am inclined to argue that this ‘ego’ or material identity referred to here is not part of the ‘tadpole’ that some readers are so fond of identifying with; that is, it is not a ‘young’ version of what they call soul, but a lost cause, a epiphenomenon of spirit reality which is doomed to be left behind like a shell.

    As for the second quote referencing an alter-ego, I don’t think the two quotes really go together in a way that can yield meaning. But I’m only saying that you have actually brought up two points not necessarily related.

    I could be wrong, and anyway I have been stimulated by your post. Your thoughts?

    -Reader.

  3. I agree with Reader that our ego is not a young version of our soul.  In my opinion, while the ego may not necessarily be ‘bad’, it does tend to focus one’s mind on superficial and selfish motives.  Or perhaps only *my* ego behaves that way.

    I read a book called the Untethered Soul which characterizes the ego as an annoying roommate who constantly complains, is defensive, on the lookout for offense, and generally causing trouble.  In my personal experience, I would say that is a pretty accurate description of the ego (or of its tendency to motivate my thinking toward “egotism” as Scott referred to it.  What I got out of the book is that we can put our ego in its rightful place by thinking of it as a roommate in our mind, and telling it to, basically, shut up.  ;-)    Our ego isn’t ourselves, it is a part of our mind that is focused on animalistic thinking.  Our challenge is to master that part of our mind by deliberately and consciously focusing on higher thoughts/ spiritual mind.

  4. BradlyParticipant
    Aug 14, 2014, 3:17 PM
    Keryn wrote:

    Our ego isn’t ourselves, it is a part of our mind that is focused on animalistic thinking. Our challenge is to master that part of our mind by deliberately and consciously focusing on higher thoughts/ spiritual mind.

    Me here:

    Semantics here gets difficult I think.  The ego is “one” me but not the only “me” once soul/morontia mind is born.  The ego me is that which is born into the material realm and identifies with that realm or aspect of reality.  We are to transfer this seat of “identity” to the the “new” “me” that is soul/morontia – nonmaterial mind.  Both ARE me if “me” is identity.  Ego is a bridge from animal mind to morontia mind, a form of individualization.  A critical element to transcendence but which itself must also be transcended.  This life is but a bridge – it is best if we do not build a house upon it (or something like that as spoken by the Master).

    "Live loyally today—grow—and tomorrow will attend to itself. The quickest way for a tadpole to become a frog is to live loyally each moment as a tadpole."

  5. TUBParticipant
    Aug 14, 2014, 3:39 PM

    Before we put new wine in old wineskin consider this phrase.

    (999.7) 91:6.4 Prayer, even as a purely human practice, a dialogue with one’s alter ego, constitutes a technique of the most efficient approach to the realization of those reserve powers of human nature which are stored and conserved in the unconscious realms of the human mind. Prayer is a sound psychologic practice, aside from its religious implications and its spiritual significance. It is a fact of human experience that most persons, if sufficiently hard pressed, will pray in some way to some source of help.

    They are telling us how prayer is a dialogue with one’s alter ego. That seems like craziness at first. But consider that when we make that first moral choice as children we form a higher self, a more personal self. This is the self that gets saved as the soul, so that when we die we don’t literally die. Only our mortal self dies. There is no way an alter ego can be bad in any way if the authers are telling us that dialogue with our alter ego is prayer. This self is naturally closer to the adjuster and God than our mere mortal self, this is the self that is reaching up towards God.

     

    I think that in this quote below the authors are talking about just our mere animal origin self/ego.

    1229.7) 112:2.20 The material self, the ego-entity of human identity, is dependent during the physical life on the continuing function of the material life vehicle, on the continued existence of the unbalanced equilibrium of energies and intellect which, on Urantia, has been given the name life.

     

     

  6. TUBParticipant
    Aug 14, 2014, 3:58 PM

    If you try and get rid of that ego/self, IMO you are literally killing yourself. IMO Buddhists are experiencing spiritual death when they do this. Because our personal self/ego is what gets saved as soul. If you get rid of that on purpose you are telling your adjuster to tear down your soul. An egotism however is a good thing to get rid of.

  7. TUBParticipant
    Aug 14, 2014, 4:26 PM

    I am trying to think of some way to help make this easier to understand. The best example I can think of right now is Jesus. How come when Jesus died he didn’t literally die. Michael is obviously still alive, but so is Jesus. So what is the catch? Michael is the Creator Son personality, and Jesus is the human self.  The higher self was built up and saved as the soul. We have a animal origin self that dies, but we also have a surviving self that gets saved as our morontia self. Michael has a soul, and we call his soul Jesus. That is the human identity that Michael has.

  8. BonitaParticipant
    Aug 14, 2014, 4:29 PM

    Brad is correct.  The material self becomes the morontia self, the new ego-entity of spirit identity.  Ego does not go away, it merely changes identity.  Ego is one’s sense of selfhood and recognition of identity; for humans it is dualistic.  The purpose of an alter-ego is to elevate the human ego with the purpose of transferring its recognition of identity from material selfhood to a higher morontial selfhood.

    Keryn wrote:What I got out of the book is that we can put our ego in its rightful place by thinking of it as a roommate in our mind, and telling it to, basically, shut up.
    That’s the way the Sufi’s think of ego too.  They call it the nafs.*  It’s a useful image when thinking about the human ego. Jesus did say that for us humans the greatest of us are those who can hold our tongues, which is essentially, controlling the nafs.  But humans, being of dual origin, have a divine ego as well. The goal is to learn of it and embrace it.  The revelators tell us that the best way to learn of it is to conceive of an alter-ego.

    *Ruh in Urdu means the breeze or breath.  In the Qur’an, the ruh belongs to Allah and he gives it to human beings according to his will.  The ruh is the spiritual drive in man which is always seeking Allah.  The breath that belongs to humans is called nafs, or self breathing. This is the property of humans which is vulnerable to evil. Allah gives man the ability to determine the difference between right and wrong through free will, intellect and revelation; and along with the ruh, enable man to control and transform the nafs to the highest level of spiritual achievement, spiritual awareness and harmony.

  9. TUB wrote:

    If you try and get rid of that ego/self, IMO you are literally killing yourself. IMO Buddhists are experiencing spiritual death when they do this. Because our personal self/ego is what gets saved as soul. If you get rid of that on purpose you are telling your adjuster to tear down your soul. An egotism however is a good thing to get rid of.

     

    I realize the alter-ego is different than the ego, at least in the context of my own posts.  The alter-ego is our higher self – our thoughts as elevated by the spirit and spiritual values.  I did not propose to “get rid of” my ego, only to put it in proper perspective.  Our ego is the ‘bridge’ and we should not build our house on it – meaning we should not consider our ego as the sum of our entire identity.  It is a transition from animal to spiritual.

    Our soul, however, is not our ego or vice versa.  I don’t think our ego “gets saved as soul”.  I think our alter-ego is used to build our soul after we leave mortal existence.  Our time here on earth is our soul in embryo form, but it does not get ‘saved’ when we end our mortal existence – it is just beginning to grow at that point.

  10. TUBParticipant
    Aug 14, 2014, 5:36 PM

    I realize the alter-ego is different than the ego, at least in the context of my own posts.  The alter-ego is our higher self – our thoughts as elevated by the spirit and spiritual values

    Okay but what if I said that this higher self or alter-ego does not die? It survives. We build up a higher identity and this higher identity is saved as the soul. “Nothing of survival value is ever lost”. If your higher self or alter-ego is genuinely craving God does that not give it survival value?

     

    (2015.4)188:3.8 3. The acquired spirit identity of the man of Nazareth which was built up during his lifetime in the flesh, first, by the direct efforts of his Thought Adjuster, and later, by his own perfect adjustment between the physical necessities and the spiritual requirements of the ideal mortal existence, as it was effected by his never-ceasing choice of the Father’s will, must have been consigned to the custody of the Paradise Father. Whether or not this spirit reality returned to become a part of the resurrected personality, we do not know, but we believe it did. But there are those in the universe who hold that this soul-identity of Jesus now reposes in the “bosom of the Father,” to be subsequently released for leadership of the Nebadon Corps of the Finality in their undisclosed destiny in connection with the uncreated universes of the unorganized realms of outer space.

    We are always trying to realize a higher degree of self. Selfhood is actually a bestowal from God. Although the term selfhood is not the same as self. Selfhood just means quality of self.

    1 – (5:6.4) The fundamental attributes of human selfhood, as well as the absolute Adjuster nucleus of the human personality, are the bestowals of the Universal Father, acting in his exclusively personal domain of cosmic ministry.
     – (9:6.4) Selfhood of personality dignity, human or divine, immortal or potentially immortal, does not however originate in either spirit, mind, or matter; it is the bestowal of the Universal Father

    13 – (110:6.10) 3. Personality reality. The degree of selfhood reality is directly determined by circle conquest. Persons become more real as they ascend from the seventh to the first level of mortal existence.

     This is the definition from google:

    self·hood: The quality that constitutes one’s individuality

     

     

  11. BonitaParticipant
    Aug 14, 2014, 5:46 PM
    Keryn wrote:  Our time here on earth is our soul in embryo form, but it does not get ‘saved’ when we end our mortal existence – it is just beginning to grow at that point.
    The soul begins to grow the moment it is conceived, around age 5.  And this growth process proceeds, “in and of itself” (117:3.6), a pretty phenomenal statement I think.  The morontia career starts right here on earth with the birth of the soul.  And this morontia entity gets “saved” upon death.  In fact, the soul is just about all that gets saved.  Perhaps I am misunderstanding what you wrote because I’m not getting your point.
    But, to Scott’s point about the Buddhists:  I agree that the attempt to detach oneself from one’s material ego through meditation, in order to break the cycle of death and rebirth thus releasing the individual from suffering, is essentially futile.  Detachment from the material ego does not mean abandonment of the material ego; it means control over the material ego, (spirit mind dominating material mind).
    Instead, I think of detachment as a perspective on the ego, the ability to observe the ego as part of the self and evaluate its behavior morally.  This is the work of personality.  Personality has the capacity for self-consciousness, and morality awareness (112:0.11).  I don’t think it’s possible to have a balanced personality without a balanced ego-identity. Personality always attempts to unify its associated selfhood on ever progressing levels.  Even the Adjusters regard the personality values of the egoistic motive (103:2.7).
  12. TUBParticipant
    Aug 14, 2014, 6:04 PM

    We are evolving a self/ego/identity. A purely animal origin self ego identity will die when we die. However a self/identity/ego that survives is a personal self that has a quality of selfhood. That quality gets saved as the soul, but the quantity also gets saved as the soul, the soul is a literal substance. Its both a quality and a quantity.

     

    1229.1)112:2.14 The possibility of the unification of the evolving self is inherent in the qualities of its constitutive factors: the basic energies, the master tissues, the fundamental chemical overcontrol, the supreme ideas, the supreme motives, the supreme goals, and the divine spirit of Paradise bestowal — the secret of the self-consciousness of man’s spiritual nature.

    Look at the title of this section..1232.2) 112:5.1.5. Survival of the Human Self… They are telling us that there is a human self that survives. That human self that survives survives because a copy of it is saved as soul.

     

  13. TUB wrote:

    I realize the alter-ego is different than the ego, at least in the context of my own posts. The alter-ego is our higher self – our thoughts as elevated by the spirit and spiritual values

    Okay but what if I said that this higher self or alter-ego does not die? It survives. We build up a higher identity and this higher identity is saved as the soul. “Nothing of survival value is ever lost”. If your higher self or alter-ego is genuinely craving God does that not give it survival value?

     

    I agree with you.

  14. BonitaParticipant
    Aug 14, 2014, 6:31 PM

    I’m currently working on a book about prayer.  Don’t know if anyone is interested, but I have a chapter on the alter ego and prayer, which is why the UB introduced this concept in the first place.  I’ll post it on another thread, tomorrow maybe . . .  running out of time today.

  15. TUBParticipant
    Aug 14, 2014, 6:36 PM

    Chris explains the self, selfhood and personality in this broadcast if anyone is interested… http://www.blogtalkradio.com/symmetryofsoul/2012/02/29/personality-and-selfhood-part-1

  16. BonitaParticipant
    Aug 14, 2014, 6:46 PM
    Keryn wrote:  Our ego is the ‘bridge’ and we should not build our house on it – meaning we should not consider our ego as the sum of our entire identity.  It is a transition from animal to spiritual.
    I’m not understanding how the ego can be a bridge to anything.  I always thought of revelation as a bridge and the source of revelation is the Adjuster.  The Spirit of Truth translates and makes it relevant for us, and by doing so, he personally becomes the way (path, bridge) from the material level  to the spiritual level.
  17. BradlyParticipant
    Aug 14, 2014, 8:02 PM

    Keryn was quoting me.  And I was trying to relate the UB to Freud’s construct wherein the ego bridges/unites the id, instinctual/animal mind with the super-ego, or spirit directed super-conscious mind which touches the soul and TA.  Semantics indeed!!

    I do agree that mortal ego stays with mortal body but that selfhood and identity of individualization – me and I Am – follows into Finality itself.  The soul has or is some form of personalization of me.  It is the ego that must manage, control and transcend animal mind but it also is the seat of our material identity which must be transferred/transitioned to morontia mind – the soul while yet mortal.

    There are many moving and associated parts in the circuitry of ME, including the 3 Spirits of mind ministry, not to mention cosmic mind and the Supreme.  It is not difficult to get a little tangled up.

    I asserted that the ego is or is like a bridge….a simple analogy and like all analogies, immediately inaccurate when taken even one step further into meaning.  Technically, a bridge is not a device “to” anything or “from” anything but simply connects two relative positions – it is non-directional.  Freud would say the ego is thusly a bridge, but also, of course, so much more.  Apologies for a crude and simplistic presentation of concept for such a complex issue.

    :-(

    "Live loyally today—grow—and tomorrow will attend to itself. The quickest way for a tadpole to become a frog is to live loyally each moment as a tadpole."

  18. Yes, a bridge is an illustration that can be used as an analogy in many contexts.  Jesus uses the bridge as an analogy in this context:

     

    156:2.1 In entering Sidon, Jesus and his associates passed over a bridge, the first one many of them had ever seen. As they walked over this bridge, Jesus, among other things, said: “This world is only a bridge; you may pass over it, but you should not think to build a dwelling place upon it.”

     

    However, one may use bridge as an analogy in other contexts, as well, as Bradly did and as I echoed in my post.

  19. TUBParticipant
    Aug 14, 2014, 8:26 PM

    I think this model has a lot of similarities with what TUB is saying. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychosynthesis

  20. ReaderParticipant
    Aug 15, 2014, 12:09 AM

    Keryn, thank you for contemplating this problem in the spirit of the higher self.

    Bradley, it is natural that an atheist like Freud would be forced to ‘load up’ his concept of ego, but I don’t think the revelators are following his usage for the simple reason that they portray a more spiritual psychology which doesn’t require a primary role for the Freudian entity. I personally would take no clues from Freud without a good argument.

    And Scott, I do not follow your assumption that the word ‘ego’ as it appears in the UB may be simply swapped out for the revelator’s other word, ‘selfhood.’ By doing so you have insinuated the existence of revealed teachings which I’m not sure actually exist.

    Bonita, the fact that the Adjuster does not disregard the ‘personality values of the egoistic motive’ (103.2.7) says nothing of the ego itself as ‘entity of material identity’ but only explains the realistic context of valid personal needs honored by the Adjuster in the course of its constant preference for alturistic motives over non-altruistic motives. This does not constitute an argument for the reality of the utterly transient entity of material identity. Personality, recall, has capacity to unify the identity of any living energy system (112.0.7).

    I still think I could find plenty of use for a word like ego if it represented specifically all that portion of intellect which is doomed to a single existence in time and space, all the scaffolding of animal mind which is not a ‘potentially spirit phase of mortal mind’ (1.3.7).

    Still thinking about this…

    Reader

     

     

     

Reply on the current forum

↑ Back to top