« On mountainless paths | Main | One-pointedness of the comic book sky »

January 12, 2010


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

You cleared so much! Thank you so much for sharing wonderful insight.
Would like to hear more of Zen stories.

Excellent, that clears up a point of confusion for me.

The term "ego" has many connotations today. It's no longer restricted to the Fruedian sense of the word. It's become the "Q-Tip" or "Kleenex" of the metaphyisical/religous/new age world.

Great post, thanks. The substitiution of insubstantiality makes much more sense, althogh saying "I am not egolessness" (as in the first) does have its own charm. ;-)

The affront to common-sense that egolessness brings is a paranoid-delusion Ayn Rand did well to puff up. The Freudian ego - what he'll refer to as a defense formation - is our conditioned being AS our clinging to the aggregates. Egolessness (what in Lacan might be understood as 'subjective destitution') makes no sense as a positive doctrine though, whether in the mouth of a psychoanalyst or buddhist, but only as an after-thought about the formal implications of practice. Only if you identify the ego as the Self can you think that egolessness means something like the destruction or absence of the Self. This is mistake of many American ego-psychologists, ostensibly working in the Freudian tradition, and those fearful of Buddhist nihilism.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo