Truly Dispelling a Controlling Ego

Written by Mathew Naismith

I received the following interesting responses from a quote I recently shared. " The meek will inherit the world and so they have, they are the one's in power who are totally controlled by a controlling ego. Their meekness is measured to the standards of their egotism, it takes a far far stronger person to dispel egotism!!".

Eckhart Tolle looks at it that "the meek will inherit the earth" is the humble or the egoless. In order to create the concept that the meek have inherited the earth - you need to be standing in judgement - pointing out that the people in control are weak and as usual with the ego - try to escape that condition by pointing it out in others. That is still ego..... 

My Reply

I'm not judging that these people are wrong in some way in being weak in any sense, I merely observed that they have no strength, which is obvious, to dispel the controlling ego. Observing void of ego is wisdom. 

Judging someone of judgement is being of the ego, this is of judgement therefore an expression of ego itself. You cannot say someone is in judgement unless you are in judgement yourself of judgment itself.

In this case, Eckhart would then be one of the most judgmental people on Earth, the reason he might not be is because he is in observation rather than judgement. To say that judgment is wrong in any sense, is pure and simple judgement itself.   

Or one might say, the weak....

My Reply

Meek means to be timid or mild in manner, weak means to be feeble, is a person who expresses less of the a controlling ego timid or feeble?

It's really in how you perceive this. People more expressive of the controlling ego, will to the people less expressive of the ego, seem weak in that they have no strength to dispel the controlling ego. However, people less expressive of the controlling ego will seem weak to anyone expressing more of the ego. To these people, it's a show of strength and control when expressing less egotism.  

Meekness is a little different in that anyone who is less expressive of the ego, is a threat to anyone more expressive of the ego, the reason for this is simple, people less of the ego are not supportive especially of egotism. People controlled by the ego need support of others who are also supportive of a controlling ego, this makes them feel more in control and powerful. When you think on this, how in control and powerful would these people be in a reality based on a  reality not controlled by a controlling ego? They would feel awfully meek and weak within this kind of reality, therefore, any sign of a less controlling ego is going to be a threat to them therefore not seen as meek or weak.

On the other hand, do people, who are less expressive of the ego, feel feeble and weak in a reality totally based on a controlling ego? The answer to this question is yes and no. well sort of.

I certainly don't feel weak or feeble in dispelling the ego to the extent I do, even when being controlled in a reality by controlling egos, however, many other people who also dispel the ego, feel feeble, weak and vulnerable as they have no control over being controlled . The difference is simple, my ego doesn't need to take control and become influential against a reality based on a controlling ego, I don't need to take control of anything, just to be focused on dispelling a controlling ego in my own life as much as possible.

We might think here, this is me taking control of my own desires to be less expressive of a controlling ego, this however isn't the case. All I am doing is dispelling the ego by being simply observant of it's destructive ways, in other words being aware instead of unaware and this is what it comes down to for me, being aware or unaware, not being in control or not in control. A question of being or not being in control is an expression of egotism, I try to avoid this myself.

I also received another interesting reply in regards to my quote.

I wonder though, if 'meek' meant something else back in the day when this quote was written - not weak like we think it is now, but the non-violent kind? That's what I'm hoping anyway - that a time will come when human consciousness is more meek, more non-violent, more peaceful :)

My Reply

Meek actually means to be timid, are controlling people expressing huge amounts of ego timid? 

At first we would say no, they are in control through force, this expression obviously isn't timid, however, to a person not about control this is a very timid way to exist. 

Anything that the ego creates, has no truthiness and isn't of the infinite self, it has no true depth, it's extremely shallow and transitory as is of all the possessions the ego creates. 

Non-violent acts are all to do with dispelling the meekness and weakness in our behavior, it's too easy giving into the ego, it takes a meek person to give into the ego especially on such a large scale, however, it takes a strong person to dispel the ego in the same situation. There is nothing meek about people dispelling the controlling ways of the ego, it's actually the other way around. 

It's interesting how each and every person perceives what is and isn't a show of meekness and weakness, we certainly have a different perception of life, one never being right or wrong over the other. It really depends on the reality you exist in and live by, giving into the ego and showing control isn't perceived as a meek behaviour to some people but to people like me it is. Is it a timid (meek) behaviour when dispelling the ego? We actually only become timid when we try to control the ego instead of just dispelling it, the ego actually wants you to control it because then you have fallen into the trap of egoist behaviour and expressions.

The message is simple, don't try to control anything, this also includes not trying to control our desires of expressing egotistic expressions, being truly aware is all you will need to do, within this, so passively will the ego influence be dispelled.