The Role of the Ego

by Chris Ott

Download this file as a PDF

Quotes by Meher Baba on ego, humility, and modesty:

Beware of modesty. Modesty, under the cloak of humility, invariably leads one into the clutches of self-deception. Modesty breeds egoism, and man eventually succumbs to pride through assumed humility. (Meher Baba's Call, September, 1954)

In modesty, you are constantly pestered with thoughts about your correct behavior to such an extent that an inferiority complex is self-created in you, and that is not strength but weakness.

No sooner humility is given an expression, it is no longer humility. It is humbug to give deliberate expression to humility. The life of humility is to be lived spontaneously, and it should not give rise to any thoughts either about humility or about modesty.

To have to try to be humble is also humbug. You must be so natural that your very life becomes humility personified, which is then all strength, free from any weaknesses. (LM 4322)

Just as the eye cannot see itself, so the ego is unable to end its own existence. All that it does to bring about self-annihilation only goes to add to its own existence. It flourishes on the very efforts directed against itself. (Discourses, Vol. II, p. 37)

Do People Misunderstand Meher Baba on the Ego?

The word ego is from the Latin word that means "I" and predates Freud. By a literal translation "the Ego" means "the I" or more specifically the individual's sense of existing separately. From Baba we learn that the end-game of Creation is for the limited ego to be annihilated (in moksha) and, if destined, replaced by the Divine or Limitless ego in Jivan Mukta.

The consciousness of the false limited “I,” which was there before fana, matured through the process of involution, and the limited false “I” was replaced by the real unlimited “I” in fana - fillah. (GS 137)

The road to achieving this condition of "I"-lessness is the eradication of sanskaras -- which we experience as desires. All yogas (such as bhakti yoga, karma yoga, and dnyana yoga) are methods for eradicating sanskaras in order to achieve this state. However, many people have thought that the eradication of the ego is itself a yoga (method). Rather the eradication of the ego is the aim of yoga. The difference might sound strange, even counter-intuitive, but it is a vital distinction.

The Discourses explain that one cannot eradicate one's own ego by use of one's own mind directly. Baba compares such an attempt to a shadow boxer who of course can never make headway in defeating his own shadow.

Some people have misunderstood this. They have tried to have no ego, claimed to have none, or too much, and point out those who they claim have much and have little. The ego doesn't shrink. It isn't the kind of thing that is big or small, strong or weak. It simply is and then it dies. Death of the false limited "I" is the aim of life, it is not the method. This becomes confusing when we read where Baba constantly refers to the ego as the problem. It is the problem. However, its eradication is not direct.

Of course one needs to struggle against all sorts of sins which include pride. This is part of the process of the eradication of sanskaras. However, though correcting one's thoughts and behavior is an essential stage in the eradication of sanskaras, one ought never think that such good behavior is itself identical with the eradication of the ego. Such efforts toward self-correction are part of living in accord with Baba's wish (thus part of bhakti), amount to living cleanly (thus mandated by dnyana and karma yogas) and help one not to make more bad sanskaras (so prudent).

However, a healthy ego is necessary at all phases of the journey up to the end. In fact it is that which surrenders at the point of surrender. So to have no ego, while living the life as a man or a woman, would not only be impossible but would amount to being entrapped in illusion permanently like a ghost.

Egoism, not ego, the sin

Reading Baba carefully shows that he does not describe the having of an ego as a sin. But rather the expression of "egoism" is. This is a sin that he speaks of often (e.g. 12 references in Discourses and LM 256, 1626, 4551). But egoism, if you look into it, is not the same thing as ego or even egotism. Egotism is an excessive or exaggerated sense of self-importance. Egoism is a corrupt attitude of considering things only in terms of one's own selfish interest.

In other words I think that when Baba speaks of egoism, when he is referring to it as a sin, he is referring to an attitude more in line with what is called "ethical egosim."

ethical egoism: the doctrine that holds that individuals ought to do what is in their self-interest.

"The obstacles to illumination are mental tendencies and desires connected with egoism, which are called sanskaras in the East." (LM 1626)

Baba is not saying to subvert one's ego by pretending to be smaller, weaker, or more inferior. Baba refers to such contortions as 'false modesty' and 'playing dead like the snake'. Such activity, when contrived by imagination, only tends to intensify the mind's sense of importance and worth -- or worse can lead to a disintegrated and maladapted self-image (mental illness).

Most of Baba's close mandali had very strong senses of individuality and personality, and could even be said to be people who conform well to what Freud would have called a healthy ego. The ego must be healthy, properly adapted, for spiritual progress. In fact even on the path it is only the scope of the ego that changes. By expanding its scope the ego is diffused.

What I think Baba is speaking of by referring to egoism is that one not be selfish, i.e. "mental tendencies associated with egoism." Such entirely self-focused behavior is itself a form of maladapted ego.

Lastly I want to point out that when Baba speaks of egoism as a sin it is within a larger context among other sins to avoid. This greater war, against all the sins of the false Mayavic self, are what eventually leads to the complete surrender of the ego.

The horizontal lines [in the game atya-patya] are the barriers representing pride, anger, greed, jealousy, hatred, envy and egoism, which the traveler on the spiritual path has to overcome before attaining the spiritual goal of God-Realization.(LM 256) But this war is not against your fellow man, it is against Maya! It is against Maya's forces! Maya's lies and deceptions and delusions; Maya's anger, hatred and violence! Maya's forces of jealousy and envy! Maya's forces of pride and egoism! This is the war, not against your fellow man, but against your false self. It is total, in the sense of total self-annihilation and self-effacement. That war is called Manonash. (LM 4551)

Self-effacement is not new to Baba. Jesus taught it in his sermon on turning the other cheek. What is new is the notion that having an ego is a sin. Having an ego is a side-effect of being in Creation seeking yourself. It is a necessary side-effect. It will go when it is no longer necessary, of its own accord, when the impressions are destroyed that create it.

the annihilation (fana) of some aspect of the false self which precedes entering each plane of the Path, (GS 286)

What I see as the potential harm of such a quasi-religious concept as 'having an ego' (or a "big ego") as a sin is two-fold.

1. Neurosis: It can lead to unhealthy ego including egotism disguised in the cloak of false modesty (a common feature of priests) or projected onto others as shadow as described by Carl Jung. 2. A New Satan: The concept of ego as the all terrible sin creature within you can lead to the invention of a new Satan, just when we were getting rid of the old Satan. This in turn could lead (if it gets out of hand) to new Inquisitions and witch-hunts, whether figurative or real, where the falsely modest hunt out and persecute those they deem as having "too much ego." I don't think it has gotten to that point yet, but I have seen writing that does definitely imply things in the Baba world are moving slowly in that direction.

The outer appearance can be deceptive

It is hardly necessary to point out that appearances can be misleading. One who is very selfish can put on a convincing show that they are selfless and effacing. Others who might appear self-involved might also turn out to be the reverse.

To emphasize this point I give one example: When Baba painter Lyn Ott wrote his book "In Quest of the Face of God" someone dismissed it as "all ego." When Lyn heard this, he hardly seemed irritated and said, "They use that word too much." Lyn had had a conversation with Meher Baba about his ego and was not very worried.

Baba had actually told him to be proud of his work and to speak up and that these were, in Lyn's case at least, not ego. "What you do for Baba is not ego," Baba had told him.

In fact Lyn was always very proud. But one could see there was so little self-centerdness in him. Lyn could write a sentence that was very self-aggrandizing, and the next moment someone could give him a suggestion to improve the sentence and he would be so delighted to have gotten the input and rush to make the change. He really thought very little of himself. So appearances can be deceiving.

Self-forgetfulness

Baba speaks a lot about self-forgetfulness. In fact, self-forgetfulness is at the heart of all the true yogas. Self-forgetfulness also happens in settings where life is lived at its best, in complete naturalness, where there is no spiritual aim. Laughter makes one forget himself. Children do too. Baba emphasized art as a wonderful way to achieve self-forgetfulness and at the same time enjoy a lot of happiness. It includes all the visual arts, the performing arts, music, writing, the art of invention, etc.

But let's say that we become a culture of people who dwell continually on our ego and its size, and are always on the lookout for others who might show signs of having an ego, to call them out and correct them. How, tell me, in such a culture of malformed misunderstanding, could one possibly forget oneself?

This self-forgetfulness in loving, sharing, playing, and working on interesting things naturally, cooperatively, and enthusiastically, is not a coma-trance where one sees nothing but the object -- as in the proverbial mad artist who sees only his canvas and has no clue he exists. Baba teaches that where there is thought there is thought of self.

In true forgetfulness it is not self-awareness that is lost, but the sense of separation ("I am apart from that") that is forgotten in the absorption of activity. This could never take place in a culture of self-absorbed anxiety about self. It can take place only in the easy-going fun of creative interchange, the sense of play, in spontaneity. Hopefully it will be this loss of concern over the self and the ego (the loss of worry itself) that will consume the New Humanity, and not a mere narrowing of life's possibilities through hampered expression.

In Stay With God, Francis Brabazon quotes of a golden age when people were honest without realizing they were honest, loved without realizing they were loving, were kind without realizing they were kind. That is the self-forgetfulness of inspired creative solutions to life's difficulties in service of all. And ironically, it is the real self-interest.

The Role of the Ego

In my short essay, Philosophy and the Path of Knowledge, I say in criticism of much of western philosophy, "The central axis around which all these kinds of inventiveness orbit is inevitably the ego or personality of the philosopher." I go on to say that, in contrast, in dnyana marga (the path of knowledge) that center of orbit is the master or scripture.

Now I want to point out a subtle but important distinction when it comes to the ego.

Until the ego dies at the moment of surrender (moksha, liberation), the ego is not a bad or evil thing. It serves a purpose. The healthy ego actually gives the push forward toward the goal.

But it is in turning the ego into the de facto pivot or axis-point (qutb) that the aspirant makes his error. This is self-centeredness or egoism. This self-centeredness (making the ego the starting point, path, and goal of all we do) is what is at the heart of hate, greed, dishonesty, and corruption of all sorts.

So there needs be made a clear distinction between the very real need for a healthy and appropriate ego, and this destructive egosim of selfishness and self-centeredness. One can have a healthy ego without being in the least self-centered. One can also be self-centered and have a crippled (or so-called small) ego.

The ego is that which gives the drive toward the goal. It is that which desires to make sacrifices to advance along the path. The id (or bare animal instincts in us) will never allow for such efforts. And it is the ego that, in the end, must make the effort of surrender. And thus there is reason to be tender to this ego, for it serves a very great purpose.

This mystical point is movingly portrayed in J.R.R. Tolkien's trilogy, The Lord of the Rings. This is based on my own interpretion of Lord of the Rings. Frodo (the pilgrim) sees Gollum (symbolizing the ego) as disgusting and suggests to Gandolf (the master) that he kill him. But Gandolf surprises Frodo by counseling him to have compassion for Gollum. "Do not be too eager to deal out death in judgment. Even the very wise can not see all ends. My heart tells me that Gollum has some part to play yet, for good or ill." We can continue this analogy of the role of the ego using this interpretation of LOTR. Much later on in the story, when Gollum (ego) is leading Frodo (the advanced pilgrim now) and Sam to the Crack of Doom, it is not always clear who is leading whom. Gollum shows the way, but also refers (intermittently) to Frodo as "Master." Taking Gollum to represent the ego, I see this as a lovely way of demonstrating how the ego is of service to the soul in energizing it and giving it a sense of urgency, but that the soul must not allow itself to be tricked into letting the ego become the master. The ego can be a very strong tool for forward movement and confidence to move on the path, but as the center or master it does the opposite. It causes calamity, sidetracks, and slows the very progress he could otherwise aid in. This is nicely expressed by Frodo being led into the web of Shelob the spider.

Finally, the ego's ultimate purpose "for good or ill" is played out in the climax, when by an odd turn of events it is Gollum, the ego, that enacts his own surrender (of attachment, power, or mind represented in the ring). It is all the more ironic because something like dying is farthest from Gollum's mind. He actually dies in a fit of greed, clasping at the ring of power in a final fit of joyful desperation. Gollum does not die knowing he is dying. He dies in bliss, believing he has at last captured the ring for himself. This I liken in my mind to the Sufi master Hafiz who, while still an initiate, in a fit of frustration leaves his master one last time to do a severe penance in order to see God, only to awaken with his mind annihilated and an angel standing there to ask him, "What do you want?" And Hafiz replies, "Only to serve my master." And then he is realized.

• My interpretion of Lord of the Rings

• You can review the entire trilogy in captions, along with frames from the film, at this site.

The importance of a healthy ego prior to God-realization

By understanding the roll of the ego in achieving moksha it is not hard to see the importance of having a healthy confident and flexible ego on the path. What is often taken as an exaggerated and inflated sense of self in cruel and dishonest people is actually often the result of a sickly and disorganized ego with no real confidence, in conflict with itself or the world. To better grasp the difference between such exaggerated compensatory expressions of arrogance, and a healthy and appropriate self-confidence put to positive use, without interrupting spiritual progress whatsoever, examine the difference in signatures and photos below.

What Baba says about real humility

I sum up with a series of quotes I could find by Baba on the subject of ego, modesty, humility, and so-forth that I think are pertinent to this article.

The following first five paragraphs are by Meher Baba on the subject of humility from LM page 4322.

Modesty is weakness, but humility is strength. A world of difference, therefore, exists between the two. The moment you say, "I say in all humility," the very expression is the expression of the ego in you. Even if in your mind you feel that you are humble, this feeling is egoistic.

The difficulty does not end even if with true honesty you try to express true humility. An obstacle, such as the thought as to what others may think of your expression of humility, is bound to come. In modesty, you are constantly pestered with thoughts about your correct behavior to such an extent that an inferiority complex is self-created in you, and that is not strength but weakness.

No sooner humility is given an expression, it is no longer humility. It is humbug to give deliberate expression to humility. The life of humility is to be lived spontaneously, and it should not give rise to any thoughts either about humility or about modesty. For example, suppose you undertake to clean a latrine but when you actually begin to do so, you cannot help smelling the stink, whereas a sweeper who cleans them all his life will remain unaffected by the stench. Similarly, the person who parades humility is like the one who smells the stink when cleaning a latrine, whereas the person who lives the life of humility is like the sweeper who is not only immune to the stink but who also remains absolutely unmindful about what others think about him and his job, because he actually lives the life of a sweeper.

To have to try to be humble is also humbug. You must be so natural that your very life becomes humility personified, which is then all strength, free from any weaknesses. Only God and the Perfect Masters can live such a life. They are the only ones who are really humble. So, whatever you may be, express it unmindful of public opinion or the reaction of others.

Be natural. If you are dishonest, do not try to hide yourself behind the curtain of honesty. That, however, does not mean that you should be dishonest. What I want to say is that you must be most natural rather than the least hypocritical.

_________________

Beware of modesty. Modesty, under the cloak of humility, invariably leads one into the clutches of self-deception. Modesty breeds egoism, and man eventually succumbs to pride through assumed humility.

(Meher Baba's Call, September, 1954)

The real goal of life is not death of the ego, but of the mind!... When the mind dies, the false ego is transformed into Reality. Real Ego is never born and never dies. Ego is always real but due to the mind, it feels and acts as limited and false 'I'.

(Lord Meher, 3713)

Just as the eye cannot see itself, so the ego is unable to end its own existence. All that it does to bring about self-annihilation only goes to add to its own existence. It flourishes on the very efforts directed against itself.

(Discourses, Vol. II, p. 37)