Sometime back, our yoga instructor spoke to us about the importance of forgiving. While most of it I agreed with, there was one part where I thought i’d a different point of view. She said that forgiving was possible only if the ego had been eliminated (for all practical purposes). My point of view (which unfortunately i didnt have time to express) was that ego was inherent in forgiving, showing that the forgiver is in a higher plane than the one forgiven. But I am assuming that the teaching was fine, there must be a kind of forgiving I am not aware of…yet.
The same kind of thoughts assailed me, when i read this post by mathatheist, where she wrote about charity. (you must subscribe to her daily musings, a wonderful read everyday) She wrote about the need for love (as opposed to pity) in charity. I am in agreement with the role of intent in everything that we do. Intent is what will drive everything else. To be fair to self, I have negligible thoughts of pity in any act of charity. The way i have driven it away is via a simple thought – I imagine someone I love, struck with a fate that the beneficiary has, and compassion replaces pity. I believe there’s a difference between the two. But the compassion is tinged with an enemy that is not so easy to dispose of – the ego. It shows its presence with a smirk and an unhealthy, unnecessary reminder to myself that I’m in a position to donate something (however insignificant it might be) for a cause. But I am assuming that the acts are fine, here must be a state of compassion without the ego, that I am not aware of…yet
until next time, to land the ego….
PS. any Ayn Rand fan here? Egosim is an important part of her Objectivism philosophy, which i am otherwise a fan of ๐
Leave a Reply to Ideasmith Cancel reply