Zazen and the 'Ego'.

I was having a sort-of conversation on another blog on the matter of the 'ego' and the implications of this term in zen practice. This post is bits and pieces from my discombobulated efforts from that thread.

People use the term 'ego' in different ways. Generally, in Western terms, it's used to denote the 'selfish self', and in Buddhist circles it often seems to have strong negative connotations. I can't help feeling that there is much of our Western religious/spiritual heritage of guilt, self loathing and self denial tied up in this term. At the very least I think it may be useful to be clear about what I'm actually talking about when I use the term. It seems to be a sort of assumption that this thing called 'ego' exists, sort of like an organ of the mind. But no such thing exists at all. Even in the Freudian model of 'ego' it is just seen as a function of the mind, not an organ or anything like that. The implication for zazen may be that when we stop doing 'ego' then there is no ego to be found anywhere... and this, of course, says something very clear about the perceived existence of 'ego'.

Part of the problem of 'ego' reification in the West may be that we have no philosophical basis to negate it. Buddhism has direct practices and a philosophical basis to counter excess in this regard (anatman or 'no-self', shunyata/'emptiness' etc), but Western culture generally does not. Our culture accepts that the ego, for example, is a ‘thing’ as if it really exists, or as if it is an actual entity or reified, tangible organ of mind. This may be linked culturally to the Christian assumption of the existence of an enduring soul or spiritual essence, or some aspect of the self that is other to, or that is more permanent than, the constant flux of things that make up our being from instant to instant.

Even Freud’s model of ‘ego’ saw it as a function of the mind, not a ‘thing’. Interestingly, although ‘it’ gets a bad rap generally, Freud saw the ego as operating to a reality principle which mediates a practical path between our chaotic, selfish id drives and the unrealistic, guilt generating moral perfectionism of the super-ego.

As can be learned very directly in meditation, our thinking is only a problem when we make it one through our own willed actions (which are most often ingrained habits that we aren't even aware that we are doing… which may give the impression of some latent self or personality?)

So, what is this 'ego', where does it reside, what does it do, does it have edges and borders, is it me, am I it, am I other than it... who's even asking?

And, if the 'ego', or any aspect of our thinking, is not the self, then what is?

The question is already being answered!

Regards,

Harry.