The Only Obstacle

1 4 the only obstacle Q Andrew, throughout our conversation you’ve referred to the ego several times. Could you explain what your definition of “ego” is? A Yes, rd be happy to. Ego is the one and only obstacle to enlightenment. Ego is pride. Ego is arrogant self-importance. Ego is the deeply mechanical and profoundly compulsive need to always see the personal self as being separate from others, separate from the world, separate from the whole universe. Ego is alove-denying obsession with separation, narcissism, and self-concern. Wow! Aren’t you making the ego into abit of ademon? Well, from the perspective of enlightenment, it is. But isn’t there another way to look at the ego? Yes, of course there is. My definition is strictly from the per¬ spective of enlightenment. When psychologists speak about the ego, they are referring to something else altogether. To Lhe only obstacle 81 speak in broad generalilies, the psychological definition of ego refers to what could be called a“self-organizing prin¬ ciple” in the psyche. It is apsychological function that orga¬ nizes the different elements of the self in order to create some semblance of wholeness and integration. If this function is not in good working order, we are going to be in bad shape. So when you use the word completely different? ego,” you’re referring to something Yes. When teachers of enlightenment use the word they are referring very specifically to that emotional and psychological knot in consciousness that is the fundamental cause of the sense of separation from all of life. Once again, from the spiritual perspective, this is defined as pride, self- importance, and the narcissistic need to always see oneself as being separate. ego, And in order to he free, we have to liberate the self from that need? Yes, exactly. Drop it like ahot potato! Do you mean all at once, just like that? If we truly want to be free, we can’t do it fast enough. But don’t you think that most of us need some time to understand what it is that we’re trying to let go of in the first place? Wouldn’t 82 living enlightenment it make it easier to transcend the ego if we first did some kind of psychological work—work that would help us under¬ stand ourselves and the causes of the pain associated with our past? Well, that’s like saying, “Before Itake abath and get really clean, Ithink I’ll jump into the garbage can and have alook a r o u n d ” ! You see, when someone says, “I want to be free,” that means free from the never-ending fears and desires of the separate ego. Choosing to spend hours and hours in aprocess of intense identification with those fears and desires in the name of eventually transcending them doesn’t even make logical sense. If we’re sincere in our desire to be free, then letting go of the fears and desires of the ego always means now. That’s the whole point anyway. We’ll never be free any other way. As long as we believe there is some value in closely examining the contents of the garbage can of the ego’s endless woes, then it simply means that we have not yet realized that it’s all only dirty garbage. So until that moment in time when we have glimpsed the enlightened perspective for ourselves and witnessed the unreality of the ego and its personal agenda, the answer to your question would have to be “yes.” But it would only be because you had not yet seen the liberating truth for yourself. You had not yet seen the ego, with its masquerade of self-importance and its never-ending agenda, for what it really is: empty and ultimately meaning¬ less, only asource of painful enslavement to aworld of illu¬ s i o n a n d f a l s e h o o d . the only obstacle 83 As long as we believe, in our unenlighienment, that there’s something of value to he found there, we will continue to insist, “1 know how bad it smells, Ireally do, and Ialso know that my clothes will get terribly stained and I’ll need to take abath when I’m finished, but Ihave to go in there. It’s very important!” You see, as long as we are fundamentally identified with the separate sense of self, there will be adeep conviction inside us that its never-ending agenda really matters. Why? “Because it’s me.” So as long as you are identifying with the garbage, you are the ego and, as lorrg as this is happening, that means that you can’t tmnscend it—right? Yes, that’s right. But again, in order to not identify with the gar bage of the ego, dorBtyou have to look into it in some way first? No. In fact, it is only when we take the enormous risk of not looking into it, of leaving the ego completely alorre, that we will finally he able to see it for what it really is. It takes tremendous courage to do this. Again, if you want to see the ego objectively, you have to leave it completely alone. There’s no other way to achieve the liberating result that I’m speak¬ ing about. It’s an all-or-nothing game and most people don’t want to play because the stakes are just too high. What’s so challenging about this is the unconditional nature of enlightenment itself. You see, we are speaking 84 living enlightenment about aleap beyond time into another dimension that reveals aperspective that is absolute. That perspective will simply not acknowledge the reality of the world that the ego lives in—because within that absolute perspective, the ego just does not exist. That’s why 1was saying it’s an all-or-nothing game. If you want to know what that perspective is for your¬ self, you have to be willing to leave this one behind. It’s leaving one world behind and entering into another; it’s discovering acompletely different way of seeing. The ego will never do this. Even the sensitive, intelligent ego will insist that the garbage is important. Of course, it will have enough perspective to recognize that it’s pretty smelly and not so wholesome, but in the end its own survival depends upon clinging to the unquestioned conviction that it is important. So in the enlightened perspective, there is anon-relative or absolute shift in the way that we see and it’s in that shift that the recognition occurs that it is indeed all garbage. And from the point of view of the separate ego and personal self, this absolute position will always appear to be way too much. It will be seen as being too extreme. And of course, the truth is that it is. The enlightened perspective, because of its non- relative or absolute nature, will always be seen as way too much from any position that insists on reducing everything to that which is merely relative. So you can see why Iwould never be able to say “yes” to the question you’re asking and be the kind of teacher that I am. From my point of view, and from the kind of liberation teaching that I’m trying to share with people, Iwould never be able to say “yes.” As long as we still believe that there’s any the only obstacle 85 relevance to what’s in that garbage can, there will never be any real freedom. Because every moment that we insist on looking at our experience from acontext that is merely relative, like it or not, we will be feeding, empowering, giving reality to the only part of ourselves that’s keeping us all in hell. Andrew, everything you’re saying seems to make sense, but why do Istill feel so strongly that Ineed more time, that I’m not ready to let go yet? Because the ego always needs more time. The perennial refrain of the ego in the face of the call from the Absolute is, “I’m not ready yet, Ineed more time.” And it always sounds so reason¬ able— from arelative perspective. But from an absolute perspective there is no time. And the call of the spirit, the call of the True Self—the command to evolve to ahigher state of comes from that absolute dimension where time does not exist. Once again, the Absolute never hears the ego’s pleas. Its ceaseless refrain is: “Every moment that you hesitate, you’re keeping yourself from me.” Its constant demand is always, “Now!” and the ego insists, yet again, “No, I’m not ready.” This is the spiritual drama that has played itself out between man and God for thousands of years—between the individual sense of self and the call of the Absolute. The whole point of spiritual life is to surrender unconditionally to that call, and that means the end of time—the end oiyour time. This is what the spiritual drama is all about—the dynamic tension between the ego’s endless excuses and the call for unconditional submission from the Absolute. c o n s c i o u s n e s s 86 living enlightenment