When I want to explain about ego and give my view or my opinion on it, then anyone else can do the same. Everyone has a valid opinion.
For some, ego is “bad” for some others, ego is “good,” and for those who are in “balance,” ego is good in some occasions and bad in others. 🙂
However, when we use gyan/ knowledge and its premises to discover ego, then we are not giving just another opinion.
Gyan mentions that we are souls. A soul has sanskaras which appear according to time. No one has the same set of sanskaras. Among sanskaras, some are closer to the original qualities of the soul (love, peace, happiness, bliss, knowledge) and some are not.
When the soul has a body and “acts,” those sanskaras appear. Those sanskaras make our “personality.” That personality is what is known as ego. Gyan tells me that “I am not those sanskaras,” I am a soul with its original qualities.
Therefore, sanskaras will play in the “predestined Drama.” It is not depending on “me” when they play, but I believe it is “me” orchestrating “my” activity. That is ego.
Once I realize that these sanskaras are playing automatically and “I” do not like that, then “I want to change them.” That is ego as well.
Who is changing who? Isn’t that “me” trying to change “me”? Which “me” will appear from that “change”? Here is when we use “nice words” such as: “I have to be sweet.”
Then we look up the word “sweet” in the dictionary and “I” make a “performance” of my thought on sweetness. That is not “natural.” It is 100% artificial. A second rated “actor.”
Ego is a personality, a personification which “I” believe exists, which I believe is “me.”
However, that “me” is non existent. Why?
Because knowledge tells me that I am the soul and those sanskaras are just playing at its own time.
The soul does not have a “personality.” There is no “Me” felt as separation, although our language brings this separation as well, because it is ego based. The soul just expresses “being “ through the original qualities, when it is not covered with the “rust” of a personality.
We could say now: “Narayan is such a good guy. Very smart, kind and sweet.” Which is to talk about someone’s perception of another personality. We will not hear something like that in the Golden age.
That personality is the one causing sorrow to us, because it separates “Me” from “You,” as 2 different entities. Ego strives to be something which is not. The other vices will come to “help out” as well, for that separation brings the idea of “survival.” Ego must survive. “I” must enjoy. “I” need to run the show. That is another illusion. Ego.
Therefore, it is not a question of labeling ego as “good, bad, necessary or unnecessary.” It is a matter of identifying it by being a “detached observer” without the “I.” A detached observer, sees the role playing but does not feel affected by it, for there is no “I.” When we see without wanting to change a thing, change happens automatically, because we can see…Then, the “I must be sweet” is completely out of our mind, for we know without “looking up the dictionary for a good word to be.”
The thing is to learn to see. To look inside. To observe the self.