Ego Thinking

Defining Self

Defining ourselves by likes, by views by dislikes — It’s a full-time job

The mind — our ego-defining, ego-embracing, ego-reinforcing and always-hanging-about mind, does not rest, does it? Ever.

Some wise old man said that we think simply in order to assure ourselves that we exist; that we exist as persons, as entities, as a me, as a you. This, of course, is straight out of Descartes’ playbook: I think, therefore I am.

But not so fast.

The only thing we can be absolutely certain exists in the presence of thought is, well, thought. Often (and we’ve all experienced this) there is no discernible thinker involved at all.

Case in point: in meditation one day, all settled, mind behaving, head calm and still (not Samadhi or anything, but a distant relative), and then, out of seemingly nowhere, like a small, silvery fish swimming through a darkish aquarium from right to left, saunters this question, as articulate as anything (and in Swedish, no less): “And what if she needs a replacement chimney? They don’t come cheap.” Swear to God.

Definitely: I, the Cartesian I, did not think that thought. And this thought did not reassure me of my existence, it only reassured (convinced, would be the better word) me of its existence.

But we do, constantly, form opinions about likes and dislikes, for this, surely, confirms our existence — I don’t like this, I like that, but not that thing over there. Well, again, the only thing these opinions about likes and dislikes really confirm is the existence of opinions of likes and dislikes. No?

That, however, is not the normal, run-of-the-mill view. We really are quite certain that we, our personal selves, are forming these supposedly well-founded opinions (which have a tendency eventually to morph into facts); we harbor these views and biases, we take these stands, and this activity is a more or less full-time job, for we want to, we need to, have to affirm our existence constantly lest we should vanish.

As if vanishing were a bad thing.

© Wolfstuff