Tag - The Myth of Freedom

The Myth of Freedom

In my recent post on Flow, Consumer Values, and iPhones, a commenter criticized me for engaging in “spiritual materialism”. He advised me to read The Myth of Freedom by Chogyam Trungpa so I could get some other perspective on my approach to spirituality. So I did that. It was a hard read, a good soporific as it had me falling asleep at times. I’m not sure if this was because it challenged my perspective so deeply that I needed to sleep in order to reconsolidate my memory, or if his words were powerful enough to transfer me into an egoless state: perhaps no longer feeling the egoic need to hold on to reality, I simply fell asleep.

The book’s title, The Myth of Freedom, refers to our behaviors being bound by the desires of the ego. Indeed, if you read my entries such as the Science of Compliance you will see why I believe that humans are not so different from rats in a behaviorist’s lab. Our “Free will” is subjugated by our hormonal desires and built-in mechanisms designed to make behavior more efficient. This is was Trungpa is referring to, and although the debate is really complex, I don’t feel capable of delving into it at this time.

Anyway, I learned a lot from the book. I learned more about the ego, which I am understanding as attempts to define oneself in relation to the environment. The ego attempts to convince us that we are real and that we exist, but its arguments are never convincing. Because its reasoning stems from random automatic observations rather than a well-constructed logical framework, it jumps from rationalization to rationalization in order to verify its existence. Trungpa submits that pain, comparisons, past and future projections are all the ego’s attempts to convince us that we exist. [Note: some people may have extremely well-constructed egos, but are still imperfect and therefore vulnerable. I'm still evaluating the relationship between ego and frame.]

Trungpa says the ego itself is unnecessary; he believes that we can transcend it. Pain itself is particularly interesting – we notice that experiential pain often flares up when the ego’s walls are breached. For example, when someone engages in a behavior that shatters our illusions of our superiority, we might break out in coughing fits. Where it gets really interesting is when we consider this in the context of social groups: pain or ego incursion may be a signal that we need love or recognition from the troop. I have ordered Julian Jaynes’s The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind and once I read it, I am sure my understanding will become more refined.

Back to Trungpa: I learned about a good theory of compassion. Previously my understanding of compassion was confined to the male/female dichotomy, and courtesy of Big Mind, Big Heart: male compassion is ruthless, female compassion is nurturing, but both are in service of the individual’s best interests. Trungpa introduces the idea of us being like grains of sand: we are infinitesimal in the universe, and we can be like grains of sand. We create space and move easily with the flow of universe, just as sand does. And this hands-off, harmonious flowing is compassion.

His description of the ten Bhumis were excellent – and worth repeating here, if not for the fact that I don’t understand them well enough to do them justice.

So as for spiritual materialism, and the commenter’s indictment, spiritual materialism is an approach to spirituality serves to enhance your ego rather than reduce it. “Oh, I am awesome because I am spiritual.” “I feel so good about myself for meditating for 20 minutes today.” “I am reading this book so I am better on the path.” In Trungpa’s view, strengthening of the ego is only working against you; the ego, as it manifests itself in constantly trying to reaffirm its own existence, is the source of all misery. So in some sense, my pursuit of enhancing my knowledge and understanding of the ego through all of this reading and contemplation could be aptly categorized as spiritual materialism, if I’m using it to enhance my sense of self. My instinct is to object, and say that I’m not – that the reason I’m trying to understand is because I’m progressing through Maslow’s four stages of learning: unconscious incompetence, conscious incompetence, conscious competence, and unconscious competence, and I’m trying to make the leap to conscious competence.

But really, I don’t know. I don’t feel emotionally “enhanced” for having a better sense of the ego, but then again, egoic positioning does not necessarily result in positive emotion. I admit that I do feel I am satisfying my natural curiosity. So I will just say that: I don’t know. It’s hard to reconcile personal development with spiritual development, since personal development is about increasing whereas spiritual development is about reducing. Can you still be proactive in your spiritual approach, even if you don’t try to use milestone-based acceleration? Trungpa thinks this is the case, for he says once you are exposed to spirituality, it is only a matter of time before you are forced back to your practice, because you realize the true absurdity of the ego. You can only work as a slave in service to your ego-master for so long before you remember what you are actually doing.

He recommends finding a teacher and submitting completely, as George Leonard recommends in Mastery. He also recommends having a really honest relationship with your teacher. Honest means not trying to impress your teacher when you are feeling strong and not trying to hide your insecurities when you are feeling weak. I’m open to finding such a Looking for teacher, but I can start by continuing honesty with my blog. I am egoic.

Some people may criticize Trungpa for his alcoholism and sexual relationships with his students. Steve Pavlina criticizes this entire approach, suggesting that not only is the recommendation of egolessness a control strategy, but it’s also not a practical approach for modern living. You can read his views here. I think that Steve has a good point, but I am reminded of the quote “Before enlightenment, chop wood and carry water. After enlightenment, chop wood and carry water.” The real world doesn’t change after attaining realization; instead, one’s relationship with it changes. But as for a synthetic, holistic, reconciliatory perspective? Again, I’ll admit: I don’t know.

Great Textpectations