Mitch Blum

One of the Yoga clichés that gets bandied about quite a bit is the idea of “breaking down the ego.” This is a really important concept, and yet, I think that it’s somewhat misunderstood. So today I shall pontificate on the role of ego in Yoga.

Ego, in a Yogic sense, is not actually a bad thing. On an individual level, the first manifestation of prakriti (matter) is buddhi, the discriminating intelligence. From buddhi evolves ahamkara, which is ego or the sense of I-am-ness. Ego is actually what allows us to become individuals. The next evolution is the mind, which is the playfield of the senses.

This separation of mind, ego, and intelligence is pretty cool. As we all know, the mind leaps about like a cracked-out monkey, constantly being bombarded with sensory inputs, memories, desires, aversions, etc. Ironically, the mind is fairly mindless, as it is way too susceptible to the endless chatter.

I like to think of buddhi as that little voice inside that’s always right. Insufferably right. The one that tells you not to have that next beer, not to make that risqué joke in a client meeting, the one that won’t allow you to lie to yourself, the one that holds yourself accountable for your actions. It’s unaffected by context, emotions, or sensory inputs.

If Homer is the mind, then stupid sexy Flanders is the buddhi!

But the ego is right in between – it has the potential to be impartial (like the buddhi) but it also has the unfortunate habit of being misled (like the mind).

So, as clever little humans we develop our clever little personas on the canvas of the ego. And all of these clever little personas have the tendency to be ruled by our colored thoughts, our fears, our insecurities and our samskaras. And we have a tendency to be attached to our carefully constructed personas, because they’re comfortable, and we self-identify with them, and we invest a lot in them.

And along the way, we become them. And we believe that these personas, which are merely manifestations of the ego, are who we are.

Ego, in a Western psychological sense, refers to “the division of the psyche that is conscious, most immediately controls thought and behavior, and is most in touch with external reality.” (American Heritage) So, in Western thought, the ego is a combination of the Yogic concepts of ego and mind.

But, when most of us think of ego, we’re actually thinking of egotism, which is a conceit, an exaggerated sense of self-importance, perhaps even narcissism.

So, when people accuse me of having a “big ego,” they’re actually accusing me of egotism, of having an exaggerated sense of self-worth. And I think that this is where the false cliché of “breaking down the ego” comes from. People interpret that phrase as an attack on egotism, and perhaps it is delivered as such, for example, when people are throwing in circus-style vinyasas. It’s also probably why people have the false expectation that all Yogis should act like Mother Theresa.

But in classic Samkhya-Yoga philosophy, ego (ahamkara) is not a bad thing. If we broke it down, we would actually lose our sense of individuality, because that is the purpose of ego. It’s the attachment to the manifestations of ego (our personas) that is bad. It’s an attachment to a false self, and it’s counterproductive to Yoga. Our true self is purusha, pure consciousness. Everything else is just a manifestation of prakriti.

So, the next someone tells you to break down the ego, try to figure out if they’re sincerely helping you on your path towards self-realization, or if they’re just nicely calling you a dickhead.