The Big & Dandy Ego Death Thread

[Shakti]

LSD, I actually take issue with your definition of ego-death. Ego is the individuated self. Losing the concept of self doesn't mean the structure and manifestation is gone. Perspective=Ego. If you are manifesting as anything, then there is ego. If there is an object of consciousness then there is a subject of consciousness, and thus there is ego.

 

[love_sex_desire]

Originally Posted by Shakti
Ego-loss isn't forgetting who you are. That's but an aspect.

Ah, now we're getting somewhere. That's not what people have been saying earlier on this page. They've been saying they have no awareness of who they are. It sounds like you have a different understanding of the term ego-loss than they do.

Are you saying if you were on a strong trip and someone asked you who you were you'd be able to answer them? Or not?

Shakti says specifically that forgetting who you are is an aspect of ego-loss. Shakti agrees that you have no no awareness of who one is, but that is only one aspect of ego-loss.

You are confusing yourself and making little sense as you look for arguments to support your predetermined intent to prove that ego-death can not exist. It's rather annoying to be humbly honest with you.

 

[love_sex_desire]

LSD, I actually take issue with your definition of ego-death. Ego is the individuated self. Losing the concept of self doesn't mean the structure and manifestation is gone. Perspective=Ego. If you are manifesting as anything, then there is ego. If there is an object of consciousness then there is a subject of consciousness, and thus there is ego.

I equate self with consciousness. Maybe that is an incorrect equation, but we're getting into subjective interpretation on the meanings of intangible words. Maybe I am incorrect? Maybe there are differing degrees of losing one's ego, and possibly I may have not experienced total ego-death? This what the thread is here for, to constructively discuss subjective experiences of this phenomena, so all of your insight is greatly appreciated.

 

[Shakti]

I agree, we need more constructive discussion on this topic, and I suspect that my objection to your definition is mostly semantic. I equate Self (capital S) with consciousness, God, Brahman, Atman, Absolute Reality etc. I equate self (lower case S) with ego. It is the smaller self which must die for one to experience ego death. So how do we differentiate the selves?

Self/God/Consciousness transcends everything. Therefore defining it is difficult. It's much easier to define through negation; by what it's not. Lower case self is ego, is individuated perspective, is the manifest world before you. It is the you that is knowable and observable as an object, including the entirety of your experience within space-time. That person you see across the room, an aspect of your ego. It is the subject that observes the object. Ego is what makes the illusory subject-object divide. When that falls away there is only pure being. Unity consciousness.

Also, as an aside, don't be so hard on Ismene. It's pretty hard to not be confused by what we're talking about unless you've experienced it. It's best not to put her or anyone off this topic. Your ego has become a servant of Absolute Reality if you've truly stabilized your realization. Your agency ought be directed to bringing communion with Absolute Reality.

 

[love_sex_desire]

I agree, we need more constructive discussion on this topic, and I suspect that my objection to your definition is mostly semantic. I equate Self (capital S) with consciousness, God, Brahman, Atman, Absolute Reality etc. I equate self (lower case S) with ego. It is the smaller self which must die for one to experience ego death. So how do we differentiate the selves?

Self/God/Consciousness transcends everything. Therefore defining it is difficult. It's much easier to define through negation; by what it's not. Lower case self is ego, is individuated perspective, is the manifest world before you. It is the you that is knowable and observable as an object, including the entirety of your experience within space-time. That person you see across the room, an aspect of your ego. It is the subject that observes the object. Ego is what makes the illusory subject-object divide. When that falls away there is only pure being. Unity consciousness.

Also, as an aside, don't be so hard on Ismene. It's pretty hard to not be confused by what we're talking about unless you've experienced it. It's best not to put her or anyone off this topic. Your ego has become a servant of Absolute Reality if you've truly stabilized your realization. Your agency ought be directed to bringing communion with Absolute Reality.

I should be more humble, but my ego has little patience with what seems to be another ego searching to discredit the claims of others. Somewhat frustrating, but those that have experienced ego-death should be able to transcend that emotion of the ego, at least for the sake of directing someone to Absolute Reality rather than scaring them off. In my defence, it seems Ismene is taking our attempts to explain this phenomena and is desperately trying to find fault with our convictions, and by doing so is making little sense when something conflicts with the predetermined disposition that ego-death is an illusion. Ironic considering the ego is the true illusion. The ego desperately tries to cling on to it's identity, and maybe this concept is too earth shattering for some egos to accept. In any case humility is virtue and I retract any negativity in our passionate discussion.

I think our differing views of ego-death are a matter of semantics, and it is reassuring to see similarities in our subjective descriptions, al though it is much more enlightening to see differences. My understanding of spirituality is that the individual self (Atman) is a subjective reflection of the universal self (Brahma). When the ego is stripped, one is exposed to the infinite and experiences this Universal consciousness. So by self I mean the Buddhist concept of Atman, the individual self, and by becoming "one" with the universe I mean becoming integrated into Ultimate Reality, the Hindu concept of Brahma.

Your analogy of the lowercase self dissolving into the consciousness of the uppercase Self seems to equate to my understanding.

We seem to have different ideas of Atman. From my understanding in Buddhism it can be equated to the individuated self or the ego. I am assuming your use of the word Atman is in the context of Hinduism which I am not as familiar with, and I am intrigued by the differences between the two meanings of the same word. I am also interested in what the Hindu concept of Atman is in relation to the Hindu concept of Brahma.

 

[Shakti]

Yes, our use and understanding of the term Atman is different, but not so different. Buddhists tend to focus on Anatman, as is consistent with their description of Absolute Reality as Emptiness. Atman thus becomes the unenlightened corollary to it. Brahman is Atman, Atman is Brahman is a view from Hinduism describing the unity of the individuated and the universal selves in the non-dual sense, recognizing that the individuated self in its essence is none other than God. Recognition and stabilization of this realization is the tricky part. Ego is a sly mistress.

My main objection to your statements before had to do with your use of the word conception. I think you realize that to experience Absolute Reality directly much more than the mere concept of self must disappear. That's nothing more than identity. In a dream you may have no conception of your waking ego identity, yet ego remains. You have an individuated perspective, you experience reality as something. In ultimate reality there is no difference between the experience and the experiencer.

 

[love_sex_desire]

^^ Thanks for clarifying my incorrect statement that merely the loss of the concept of the self is the same as direct experience of Ultimate Reality. Ego-death is not only the loss of the concept of the self, but the realization that the true self is a reflection of the infinite consciousness of God. I think there may be differing levels of ego-loss, but true ego-death is the profound divine realization, and when facilitated through psychedelics can be considered the Shulgin Plus Four (++++).

I'll have to look more into the Hindu concepts, but I appreciate you clarifying the differences and relations. I'd also like to mention that I experienced ego-death before I was familiar with eastern mysticism. Many years of contemplation and integration of my psychedelic experiences culminated in my experience of complete ego-death. After this experience I became much more spiritual and was utterly in awe when I discovered parallel concepts in many spiritual traditions, most notably Taoism and Buddhism.

An amazing read for anyone interested in the parallels between science, spirituality and also psychedelics in the sense that the author was motivated to write the book after a plus four LSD experience is:

"The Tao of Physics"
by Fritjof Capra

This book confirmed my intuition of the parallels between eastern mysticism and science, through the concept of the yin-yang and similarities in science such as "every action has an equal and opposite reaction." The book goes into much greater detail than my initial intuition, expanding on similarities between spirituality and the discoveries in quantum physics

 

[E-Natural]

I'm pretty sure I experienced ego death the last time I dropped acid. It was completely bizarre and unexpected.

I was watching a movie, and I started becoming different objects and environments in it. At first I thought it was just because I was having an intense trip, but then the word 'death' was mentioned, and I literally began thinking I had just died. Within minutes, I completely forgot who or what I was, and the difference between me and everything around me just melted away. I had no control over anything I thought or said for the next four hours, no memory, and no idea what was going on. I didn't recognize anyone anymore (my boyfriend and best friend were with me). I kept asking "What's happening?" And no matter what they said, their answers didn't make sense to me, and in the rare moments that they did, the thought was lost almost instantly, and it was right back to "What's happening?". It was a state of complete loss & helplessness, an out-of-control hell of the mind that I couldn't escape and didn't think would ever end.

The most basic thing we have is the self. If you have thoughts, it's because you are SOMEONE. If you lose the sense of that, what are you left with? You're just a mind lost in a sea of nothingness. Although I'd heard the term before, I didn't understand what ego death was before it happened to me. I thought I had just gone crazy, and at the time the whole ordeal was insanely terrifying. I'm glad I got to experience the world without me though. My perception of existence has been completely overhauled.

 

[Gormur]

ime it's when you lose yourself in the experience, all pre-conceived notions of subjective sober reality and personal identity vanish, you become one with the universe and experience the divine

this realm is magical and inexplicable, with no boundaries. you are everything and everything is you. you are not alive or dead. you simply are the energy of universal existence which transcends space and time

 

[Xorkoth]

You seem to be arguing for the sake of arguing

Ismene has a tendency to do this. I can recall more than a handful of times over the years where I about tore my hair out, felt like I was beating my head against the wall... and often ended up getting something out of it in the midst of all the stubbornness and refusal to consider anything beyond his original intended view.

This time though, Ismene, you just plain do not know what you're talking about. It seems clear you've never experienced ego death (which is a bad term for it anyway but I'll get into that another time). I can understand that you don't understand, but just please try to understand that you're totally missing the point. You keep trying to focus on random scenarios you seem to think of as qualifiers of the experience, like giving away your money or responding to a fire, but in the full state of ego dissolution you are beyond subjective experience of any kind and merged with infinity. There is no basis for understanding how this state is without experiencing it, so it must seem to you that people are speaking vague nonsense, because the state can't be put neatly into words.

You say that we don't know what we're talking about because you've seen many different definitions for what ego death/dissolusion is. But any attempt to define the state with words communicated from a state in which we are experiencing ego is just a partial description, so you're going to end up with as many ways of describing the state or thinking of the state as you have individual trippers. So although it is clear some of the participants of this thread do not know what it is, and use it to describe an intense trip, there are many who have given different sorts of answers who have in fact experienced it.

I think it's pretty foolish to discredit the idea that the state is real because you yourself have never experienced it, particularly since so many have.

Ah, now we're getting somewhere. That's not what people have been saying earlier on this page. They've been saying they have no awareness of who they are. It sounds like you have a different understanding of the term ego-loss than they do.

Are you saying if you were on a strong trip and someone asked you who you were you'd be able to answer them? Or not?

Not during the period of time during which you are experience ego loss, no. My most powerful trip during which I experienced full ego loss was with mushrooms, and I was in that state of 4 minutes, but that 4 minutes was meaningless during the experience, as I became infinity and experienced eternity and other lifetimes and complete awareness and access to experience. Had something happened to me during those 4 minutes I would have had no awareness of it.

Then I came back and experienced a strongly diminished ego for hours but not full ego loss. During this period of time afterwards I was aware and experiencing life and "me" but "me" had become something much greater, the regular human "me" being one tiny little speck of the whole that "I" had become, off in the corner, remembered, able to accessed, but relatively insignificant. There is no doubt it my mind I would have not cared had my wallet been taken, and had someone else needed it more I would have given it. The concept of money no longer meant anything to me, though I understood what it was and mean. Had I thought about it in a particular way, I may have decided to keep it after realizing that money would be important to letting me live my physical life later on. But if someone else had needed it more I would have prioritized them.

This is an example of both total ego loss/dissolusion and ego reduction.

 

[adrian89987]

Do you have any awareness of what's around you? Or if there was a fire in the house would you just lay there and burn?

And bullshit can only be called once I'm afraid...

I may have not laid and burned...maybe writhed around and burned a bit, but I most definitely would not have been putting it out or running from the house.....much less yell "Fire!"




I need to recheck my bullshit manual, I wasn't aware of that rule.

 

[Ismene]

You seem to be getting yourself caught in subjective linguistic arguments. The subtitle of the book is "A Manual Based on the Tibetan Book of the Dead." The Psychedelic Experience is based on the Tibetan Book of the Dead, so maybe re-written is not the most accurate word, but that has little to do with what I was trying to say.

You seem to be using subjective linguistic interpretation to discredit what I said that has little do with the topic at hand. Whether the Psychedelic Experience has ANYthing to do with the Tibetan Book of the Dead, I was simply giving an example where an early use of the term "ego-death" is used.

Yes I'm aware that Timothy Leary talked about ego-death. I've read the book. But just because Tim Leary said so do we have to accept it as inarguable truth? Don't you think there's a possibility that Tim Leary tossed the idea around and because he was popular at the time it became an article of faith among people who had half-heard of the idea through him? Telling your friends "I took LSD and experienced ego-death" sounds a lot more mature and exotic than "I took LSD and had a laugh and a cry".

Their is little doubt about the experience of ego-death. I suggest researching Buddhism as Buddha became the enlightened one after he initiated nirvana by letting go of all of his desires and experiencing the completely dissolution of his ego. Desire and ego are intrinsically connected, and these concepts are explored intensively in the practice of Buddhism. Do yourself a favour and do a little research on something you so passionately argue against.


I've read more than enough books on Buddhism, and I've also researched the reality of Buddhism. I've read the history of Tibet where supposedly "enlightened monks" lived like kings while brutalising a population they used as slaves. Just because someone talks about being "enlightened" doesn't mean they are - always look at what they DO rather than what they SAY.

 

[love_sex_desire]

But just because Tim Leary said so do we have to accept it as inarguable truth? Don't you think there's a possibility that Tim Leary tossed the idea around and because he was popular at the time it became an article of faith among people who had half-heard of the idea through him?

We should not accept ego-death as an inarguable truth just because Tim Leary said so. Of course not. I did not say that. I said we should accept it as a truth due to the overwhelming accounts of people that have experienced this phenomena, including Leary, indigenous cultures, Buddha, myself and many others.

I was using Timothy Leary as ONE example, and from my knowledge the first account of the use of the term ego-death.

I had never researched ego-death before I encountered the transcendental experience, so I was not aware of Leary's term. After my experience with ego-death and after researching psychedelics and spirituality further I came to realize that other people had experienced the same thing termed ego-death, such as Siddhartha Gautama.

I have only experienced ego-death once. I was on LSD. I felt my entire identity strip away from my being and my being integrated into the universe. I came to the realization that God is infinite, everything is a part of God and we are all one. We are all God. We are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively. This subjective consciousness is our ego, but when one experiences ego-death they realize that their is only Universal Consciousness.

I was brought to my knees with my arms outstretched to the sky as I felt the universal consciousness permeate my being and expand throughout the universe at a crescendoing rate. As I felt my entire ego stripped away, the awareness of who I was completely disintegrated. There was only pure consciousness. There was only Universal Consciousness. This is what I mean by ego-death.

Are you denying that experience from me? Are you saying that I never experienced it? Are you suggesting that I am making this up? Who are you to deny the experience of others?

I understand that some people on this thread have not experienced complete ego-death. There are differing degrees of ego-loss. All are indicative of a fairly intense trip, but not all intense trips are indicative of ego-loss. Ego-loss is indicative that the concept of the self is becoming vague. This may culminate in a full ego-death where the mind is integrated into the universe, and Pure Being is experienced. Full ego-death is a spiritual experience.

I've read more than enough books on Buddhism, and I've also researched the reality of Buddhism. I've read the history of Tibet where supposedly "enlightened monks" lived like kings while brutalising a population they used as slaves. Just because someone talks about being "enlightened" doesn't mean they are - always look at what they DO rather than what they SAY.

I have done things I am not proud of, as has everyone. That does not mean my actions discredit my entire legitimacy.

Do the actions of modern day monks discredit the legitimacy of a spiritual practice that has been around for thousands of years?

Of course not, Buddha's legitimacy has nothing to do with his followers thousands of years later.

Do the priests that molested children discredit the entire teachings of Jesus Christ? Of course not, Jesus' legitimacy has nothing to do with his followers thousands of years later.

We are all followers in our hereditary lineage. Are your actions indicative of the legitimacy of your entire family?

I see no difference between that and suggesting that the actions of Tibetan monks are indicative of the legitimacy of the Buddha, and all Buddhism.

Are you suggesting that because some Tibetan monks claimed to be "enlightened" and abused their power that the experience of ego-death is discredited?

Again, I am not too sure what you are trying to suggest. If a Buddhist somewhere does something questionable, you seem to be using that as justification for discrediting the entire teachings of the Buddha. This is a logical fallacy.

My questions are:

Are you denying ego-death because you have never experienced it?

What makes you think that I have never experienced ego-death?

Are you trying to deny me of my own experiences?

Are you trying to deny others of their own subjective experiences?

Are you denying the legitimacy of Buddha based on his followers?

I so, are you denying the legitimacy of ego-death based on the Buddha?

 

[love_sex_desire]

So crucify the ego, before it's far too late

To leave behind this place so, negative and blind and cynical

And you will come to find, that we are all one mind

Capable of all that's imagined and all conceivable

 

[puckboy]

I've experienced the loss of ego once (ego-death), from smoked DMT. I've had heaps of crazy, out-there, blah-blah, etc experiences on LSD primarily and also mushrooms but nothing like what a large hit of DMT did to me.

I no longer knew who I was, where I was, or that I'd even ingested any drug (immediate memory loss) it was like being transported to an alien dimension. I simply 'was' but it wasn't really 'I' if that makes sense. I was dead. But this place I entered seemed as if it had always been and was always going to be there, it was a void of nothingness, yet I recognised it as having existed already (DMT simply transported me back to this 'place'). Fuck, words are terrible at describing the feeling. The experience goes beyond any words or descriptions could ever give it justice.

Initially it was terrifying (and I mean FUCKING terrifying), but within perhaps 30 seconds?, I was just 'there'. But there was no 'I'. By the time I 'came to', (regained my ego) I was experiencing the most intense visuals I'd ever seen and was in complete and utter awe at what had just occurred.

This description still doesn't make sense because I still use the word 'I' when referring to what happened when there was no 'I'. Fuck, it was one of the most intense experiences of my life and still shapes my ideals and beliefs to this day.

If every human knew what it felt like to have no ego, even for 1 minute, this world would change and for the better IMO.

 

[Ismene]

We should not accept ego-death as an inarguable truth just because Tim Leary said so. Of course not. I did not say that. I said we should accept it as a truth due to the overwhelming accounts of people that have experienced this phenomena, including Leary, indigenous cultures, Buddha, myself and many others.

No, you can't lump them all together like that. People tripping are not experiencing the exact same thing as people in indigenous cultures or buddhists experience by meditation. Even the Buddhist themselves say it isn't the same thing (check out the book "Zig Zag Zen - Buddhism and Psychedelics")

I was brought to my knees with my arms outstretched to the sky as I felt the universal consciousness permeate my being and expand throughout the universe at a crescendoing rate. As I felt my entire ego stripped away, the awareness of who I was completely disintegrated. There was only pure consciousness. There was only Universal Consciousness. This is what I mean by ego-death.

No, I don't believe you didn't have any access to your conscious/unconscious mind during this experience. I think your mind was guiding and directing the experience according to the beliefs you held dear.

Are you denying that experience from me? Are you saying that I never experienced it? Are you suggesting that I am making this up? Who are you to deny the experience of others?

No, I'm not denying you had an experience. The question is whether it was anything to do with "ego-death" or more to do with the contents of your mind working in conjunction with the LSD to give you an experience you desired.

Do the actions of modern day monks discredit the legitimacy of a spiritual practice that has been around for thousands of years?

It's not really "modern-day monks". The Dalia Lama system has been around since the 1600's. It operated as a slave state with the monks as the slave-masters for that entire time.

If you're asking me can you be an enlightened slave-master then the answer is a resounding no.

 

[Ismene]

I'm extremely sorry to admit Ismene, but you got us! You have utterly discredited yourself with that statement. That is simply too hilarious to be taken seriously. I'm now convinced your arguments are all just a joke and you're just trying to be funny. Thanks for the laughs!

No, the bullshit line was a gag. The rest is serious. You can be serious and have a sense of humour too.

 

[Shakti]

No, you can't lump them all together like that. People tripping are not experiencing the exact same thing as people in indigenous cultures or buddhists experience by meditation. Even the Buddhist themselves say it isn't the same thing (check out the book "Zig Zag Zen - Buddhism and Psychedelics")

Tripping isn't the same thing. But, you don't seem to get that what we're talking about is radically different than simply tripping. Ego-death is ego-death. There are many paths to the top of the mountain, but the view is the same.

No, I don't believe you didn't have any access to your conscious/unconscious mind during this experience. I think your mind was guiding and directing the experience according to the beliefs you held dear.

This belief is an expression of your ignorance. You simply don't know or understand. It's sad to say, but you're simply out of your element in this discussion. You speak of something that is unknowable but through direct experience, you don't have the experience, yet you continue to speak as though you're beliefs on something you're completely ignorant of are relevant. I hope someday you'll experience what we're describing and have a good laugh at your former self.

 

[love_sex_desire]

No, you can't lump them all together like that. People tripping are not experiencing the exact same thing as people in indigenous cultures or buddhists experience by meditation. Even the Buddhist themselves say it isn't the same thing (check out the book "Zig Zag Zen - Buddhism and Psychedelics")

I'll check that book out, thanks. I have a sneaking suspicion that Buddhist's want to distance themselves from psychedelics because it is against the practice of Buddhism to consume drugs. Of course they wouldn't want to admit that a drug can help facilitate spiritual development. I don't think any two people experiencing ego-death will have the exact same experience. Even two people meditating to achieve ego-death will have different experiences.

No, I'm not denying you had an experience. The question is whether it was anything to do with "ego-death" or more to do with the contents of your mind working in conjunction with the LSD to give you an experience you desired.

You seem to know what ego-death is not. I'd love to hear what you think ego-death is? The question is whether my experience has anything to do with ego-death, so I would love to hear why you don't think it had anything to do with ego-death.

It's not really "modern-day monks". The Dalia Lama system has been around since the 1600's. It operated as a slave state with the monks as the slave-masters for that entire time.

If you're asking me can you be an enlightened slave-master then the answer is a resounding no.

I'm not asking if the monks were enlightened. I implied that I didn't think the monks were enlightened by writing "enlightened" with quotation marks. My question was if their immoral practices could discredit the fact that Buddha experienced ego-death. If you agree that ego-death is possible, then what constitutes ego-death? Having never experienced it, I don't think you are in the right position to be arguing against those that claim they have. What makes you qualified to argue against my experience of ego-death?

 

[colorsinthevoid]

I can't believe you guys are assigning so many words to the ego death experience. Any time I try to describe it I just become frustrated at how inadequate and meaningless my attempt at communicating what I felt (or didn't feel) is.

However I can say that I think the term "the witness" with all its implications is a pretty damned good description of what "you" are during it.