Angry with prayers

[juergen]

it seems we have different definitions of definition!

Dunno what to to about it!

Have no better idea than to contemplate and let it sink in.

Interesting indeed.

Thanks for Your views,

juergen.

: This sure is an interesting discussion!

: "when ego is viewed as karmic crap this is not to say that psychologic ego is viewed as karmic crap"

: - I am not sure that this way reasoning is valid. Now, I don%rsquot mean what you say expressly, but what you suggest, namely that psychological ego is accepted as something else than karmic crap. In principle we have to do with different paradigms of thinking and to the extent that psychological ego actually is something else than %ldquoyogic ego%rdquo (at least Jung has written about kundalini in a way that indicates that he agreed to the yogic definition of ego) I doubt it even exist as a concept in yogic philosophy. But if so; that does not indicate that it is accepted as something else than karmic crap, but only that it is not accepted at all.

: "karmic crap is the definition of ego in FST"

: - I don%rsquot agree with you here. Ego might be made of karmic crap, but something has to be added to that information. Saying that ego is karmic crap is not much of a definition. It%rsquos more like saying that apples are atoms. It sure is true, but it still doesn%rsquot distinguish apples from any other object of matter. So, I think we have to add something to distinguish ego from other karmic crap.