Cory.
I know of a guy who trained very hard to swim in the arctic ocean. This involved subjecting himself to a lot of discomfort and pain, but I think he was moved largely by feelings of excitement. The same goes with body builders. Certain kinds of pain yield pleasure.
A guy like Diogenes? I'm sure all the struggle and effort he put into being stoic (rolling in hot sand and freezing snow) was fueled by the excitement he felt when he thought of how powerful he could become.
Absolutely, no doubt about that. Good examples.
But whether or not the ego can eventually function without being motivated and moved by excitement is not something I can be certain about. I really don't know.
In my opinion, it cannot without motivation.
Not necessarily excitement, but the key word as you correctly mention is motivation, and that revolves around self-centered values and feelings; self-sacrifice could be a strong motivation; the goal of achieving ego-less-ness since one values it so, could be a strong motivation for the ego itself. For me ‘ego’ is but the pure “Iâ€, an inherent sense of being through merely sensing that which is “not I†which cannot be eradicated as long as consciousness is.. Now to consider that I exit inherently, that is, totally independent of all that there is, is what I would define a false-ego that overlays this necessarily real EGO; Self; a necessary sense without which one cannot operate or think at all. Not even think of independent or dependant existence, but one can however get rid of a false-ego, PRIDE in a Self as being independent, through reasoning, but never the real Ego; I.
I don’t see any essential difference between the Self, or purely the I, or Ego, because it necessarily remains Self-centered in nature, and self-interest always remains the motivation; even that of not valuing anything at all, which ones self-centered-values (or judgment) justify it for him. Which could lead to a sense of nihilism or depression.
I'm not so sure about this. An individual is a part of a larger whole, and I think it's beneficial to realize that, as an individual, one's action is not divided from the action of the other individuals.
Sure, realizing that is surely beneficial, but what does that realization do? In my opinion turns one humble enough to shed false-pride, shed false-ego. It should shatter the sense that I am something profoundly significant in and of MY Self, divorced from all else that there is.
For instance, it isn't a choice that the supermarket happens to be where it is, is open at a certain time, is stocked with certain food. My action is dictated by the actions of others, and ultimately, all actions are connected to form a single movement.
The single movement you talk about is HERE and NOW. One must not forget in this moment that one is as much a cause as one is an effect. You are simply taking the factor that you are but an effect of all else, and not a cause of anything at all. For Pete’s sake, YOU are a causally created thing too, and have a particular nature, and in the above example, your intellect can decide to go at 10 am or 2 pm since you know the opening hours are 9am to 9pm. You may have many other reasons to go at a particular time, and your intellect alone decides that, taking into account circumstances and the information you have retained in your memory, and calculate internally. External stimuli do not directly force you to do anything at all, but your internal calculations of information held in your memory do. You are as much a product of causality as causality is a product of YOU.
So, the supermarket is out of stock of my favourite green beans, so what the hell should I do? Just stare and wait until red beans cause me to pick a tin of THAT? Are you telling me that you have no intelligence as a particular Self that is capable of using information, and coupled with what YOU might feel good then, that may guide you to pick up a steak instead? Surprise! I was caused to pick up stake, but by what? The steak being there itself, or how I felt or decided then? So what if it that was an Ostrich steak, may be I felt like trying it; the Ostrich steak was not calling out to me,
my sense of adventure was.
Yes, true, but that's a more spontaneous and meager sort of helping, as opposed to a more consistent and continuous helping involving donations of money.
And both of them require self-centered values and feelings at its core, irrelevant of any $$$ being involved, and that was my point.
Do not for a moment think that I am trying to whitewash those that donate or help for wiping off their guilt that arises through false-ego, like God will reward me, or the hope that I will be miraculously rewarded for my good Karma.
