Interesting bit of Science Fiction. But is it an accurate description of the proper function of the ego and what causes it to not function properly?

FUNK & WAGNALLS Standard Desk Dictionary defines ego as:

1. The thinking, feeling, and acting self that is conscious of itself and aware of its distinction from the objects of its thought and perceptions.
   
2. Psychoanal. The conscious aspect of the psyche that develops through contact with the external world and resolves conflict between the id and the superego.
   
3. Informal Self-centeredness; conceit.
   

At best, "Lazaris" depiction of ego is a misnomer. There may be an aspect of us that is meant to act as a liaison, and we might misuse that aspect, but to refer to that aspect as ego is improper use of the language. Even the psychoanalytical definition has the ego making decisions. In fact, it's almost antithetical to Lazaris' description - the ego takes on the responsibility to regulate between the instinctual (id) and overly-moralizing (super-ego).

My own feelings about the function and dysfunction of ego are that the ego represents the part of us that is aware of our uniqueness, that distinguishes us from others. The dysfunction results from an over-emphasis of that distinction - the inability to recognize and realize the Oneness of us all. This can manifest as competitiveness. It can manifest as an inability or unwillingness to be responsible for our impact on others. For if we recognize our Oneness with others, the Golden Rule takes on new meaning. By doing unto others as we would have them do unto us, we are really doing unto ourselves - the part of "ourselves" that is masquerading as "someone else".

If we over-emphasize Oneness, then we could easily blame others for our actions - after all, if we are all One, they you are just as responsible for my actions as I am. It can also result is us not taking proper care of ourselves. So, from where I sit, a dysfunctional ego may be better described as an "imbalanced ego", rather than a "negative ego".

These are my thoughts about ego - they may or may not work for others - they are not coming from the "Higher Realms". It would be "egotistical" of me to think that my thoughts about this are gospel[g]. But the exercise demonstrates that Lazaris' teachings are not gospel either.

Great idea, and thanks for taking the time to reference the Seth Material.

I think Jach took this idea of "negative ego" to new heights when drawing from the definitions and functions of ego from different sources, including, as you point out, the Seth materials.

A search for "negative ego" on the internet brought me this quote from alt.religion newsgroup. A poster had asked about Lazaris' definition of "negative ego". The response included this interesting bit.

"Many ascetic religious traditions disempower the individual through focus
upon 'the evil ego', and what this comes down to is a kind of cult-
mechanic which subsumes the person's power to that of the group, often
through the mechanism of shame, guilt or fear. One of the best indicators
of a dangerous religious cult is that they criticize egotism and individual
thought or behavior. This can also be seen in totalitarian political
systems. The two are not very different, really."

In my experience with the Lazaris materials, and through my participation in the Forum, I can see how Jach has taken this concept of a negative ego state to new heights, and I wonder if it was deliberately constructed to function as a control mechanism, or if Peny grabbed onto it somewhere along the way and began to use it as such, and drilling her Gang in its use as a whip.

Regardless of how or why the manipulation began, it is so clear to me that this "negative ego" myth is used to control, shame, and guilt trip people. It is used as a weapon by the Gangstas who themselves it would seem never themselves fall prey to this state.

Anyway, I know this is a bit off topic.

Before we put up this message board I spent a lot of time researching the possible sources for the Bizzarus materials. I found a lot of interesting stuff, It will be fun to find some of it again and post it here.

It's important, I think, to share with each other the information and process each of us has gone through to come to our conclusions about the JachZaris materials.

Is it actually not only possible that there is no Lazaris, but that there is no "negative ego" as defined by them? Could it be true that those of us who question the materials and the behavior of the Gang are not actually fueling a "psychotic killer" by doing so?

Maybe it isn't the "negative ego" which is the enemy, but our belief in it which causes the devastation.

Lots of love,

On the Ego:

The ego does want to understand and interpret physical reality, and to relate to it. It wants to help you survive within physical existence, but by putting blinders upon it, you hamper its perception and native flexibility. Then because it is inflexible you say that this is the natural function and characteristic of the ego.

Source: Seth Speaks, Session 531

Quotation: The conscious mind is meant to make clear judgments about your position in physical reality. Often false beliefs will prevent it from making these, for the egotistically held ideas will cloud its clear vision.

Source: The Nature of Personal Reality, Session 614

If the ego were allowed to make all the choices, with no veto power from other layers of the self, you would all be in a sad position, indeed.

Source: Seth, Dreams, and Projection of Consciousness, Chapter 16, Excerpt From Session 234

Cheers,

Dear Katie,
[[Maybe it isn't the "negative ego" which is the enemy, but our belief in it which causes the devastation.]]

Excellent point and I agree. The neurosis we have invitation to develop around what Lazaris teaches about negative ego is profound.

The dire descriptions and the purported potential threats of an "unbusted" ego are so vividly portrayed, I think alot of us just out of fear scrambled to incorporate the information and overlooked the mixed and confusing contradictions in the material. Those were dismissed as the negative egos attempts to avoid prosecution..[bg]

Mixed messages:

Lazaris teache the ego is weak BUT the ego can destroy in minutes what has taken you a lifetime to build.

Lazaris also teaches that negativity is weak.

Two statements from Lazaris. Ok, if negativity is weak and the negative ego is all about negativty and yet the negative ego can destroy in minutes what it has taken a lifetime to build HOW WEAK DOES THAT MAKE US? How does our subconcious interpret that message?

Negativity may be weak, but you are weaker..lol

Look, Lazarians would argue that being in negative ego makes you weak..bla blah..

What I think is worth examining is what you pointed out. Perhaps the conception of the negative ego and the process around it is the dangerous, life threatening thing.

Obviously anybody with half a brain knows that you can ruin something precious in a moment by doing something stupid.

Lazaris introduces a steady diet of fear into the concept of self destruction by animating the ego endowing it with purpose and motivation .

Lazaris says the negative ego is out to destroy us. Hates us. Is angry at us for placing too much responsibility on its shoulders and now wants revenge.

What is created is a very palpable image of an ENEMY that is doggedly pursuing you throughout your day. This is a very fearful thing to say the least.

What if that isn't true. What if the simple truth is the ego is a part of the whole personality. What if the ego isnt split into a duality of positive and negative?

What if the ego is not life threatening?

What if fear and focusing on fear makes you defensive, hostile and always ready for attack?

What if it isn't mad at us and isn't out to destroy us?

What if ? Lazaris always said one of the reasons the ego is allowed to take over is that we refuse to think.. so lets think about it..LOL

It sounds so good, so plausible.. yes most people are afraid to think, many people do refuse to take responsibility for themselves and do the other things that Lazaris says create an opportunity for the ego to take over.

However it occurs to me that much of what is considered "Negative Ego" can simply be handled by common sense and by applying basic spiritual principles to your life.

Why the unholy focus on this monster within. Granted it is a worthy concept an people do screw things up pretty miserably out of delucion and self importance.

Speaking of delusion and self importance, Peny North springs to mind, so lets use her as an example.

Now assuming [and we all know what a generous assumption this is] Peny works with her ego, as Lazaris conceives of it and reccomends.

I don't think many would argue that Peny North exhibits every last symptom of Negative Ego that is outlined in the Lazaris material Delusional, self important, doesn't seem to be too intereted in thinking. Judgemental and Punishing.

Lets just assume she has been applying these techniques to herself. IF so they really don't work very well do they? The seem to generate the qualities the process is meant to eliminate or "bust"

Maybe the hysteria and fear and self doubt that Lazaris inspires when he discusses negative ego in fact makes it virtually impossible to focus on anything but fear and the resentment that fear produces.

Maybe thats whay Peny and the Gang are so defensive, hostile and insulated. Perhaps they are so convinced of an enemy within that they see an enemy in anything and anyone that doesn't completely agree with them on everything.

More later..gotta run.

"peny said you'll notice you are in your neg. ego when you don't give us all your money.

lazaris then agrees with her and said that the neg. ego will tell us not to give all your money to laz"

Jade