Competition seems to be at the root of all evil (biggest, richest, etc.) but also at the root of all evolution - how else did we climb out of the swamp. Is there such a thing as healthy competition?

It depends upon your Intent. Competition is probably largely out of ego though. Because, by the very nature of competition, you are trying to prove you are better than someone else.

Intent is correct. Competition is healthy when it’s out of love. It can be a driving force toward the improvement of both self and other self. :)

Tom on competition:

Competition

Maybe the egoic lens looks at best effort or excellence
and projects something negative.

In sport, the more evolved person is focused on getting
in shape and the social aspect. The less evolved person
puts great importance on winning.

In business there can be so many motivations. The
team is greatly dependent on you making best effort.
There are clients and customers relying
on you providing a safe and reliable product
or service. Your spouse and children are dependent
on you doing well. There is the satisfaction of
a job well done, and of succeeding at new
challenges.

We all know the feral office beast who is obsessed
with beating out the other person, at any cost. This
actually is self limiting as success is largely
interactive and trust based.

Unlike sport, work is not
a zero sum game.

_________________
Does this PMR make my butt look big?

Tom: Competition derives from fear. There is no need to prove yourself, or prove that you're better, unless you're fearful that your not good enough.

More here at 1:26
Workshop Questions - Fear
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrVgwTS ... &t=0h1m31s

Thank you all for your replies. I appreciate the links which I have yet to look at.

Competition in its rawest form is ugly; most of us would agree about that and I understand that examples of good competition centre around motive or intent.

VB's "I" versus I allusion is what intrigues me and what I take to mean the elimination not suppression of ego-centred living, and the fostering of an other-centred awareness. So there's still a battle (competition) isn't there?

And it's this notion of struggle that I find difficult. We are who we are with personalities, proclivities, faults and failings.

Apologies for not being able to provide a link and no doubt someone will put me right if this isn't so, but I'm fairly sure I heard Tom once use the metaphor of the need to grasp ego by the neck and squeeze it.

So here's another question: Can ego be recognised for what it is (part of who we are) assimilated, brought under control, tamed in other words, or does it have to be strangled?

Tom: Ego is defined as awareness in the service of fear. Belief and expectation are often products of ego and always products of fear.
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=11204&p=104139#p104139

Tom talks a lot about getting rid of ego, but this is my favorite:

No, we really can get rid of that ego, or at least almost get rid of that ego. Now getting rid of the ego doesn’t mean you no longer know who you are. You know, you have to pin your name on your shirt and look in the mirror to see who you are! That’s really not what ego is. Ego isn’t just an awareness of self. You can be self-aware and not have an ego. The ego is defined in the “self” analyzing, judging, and doing things to make life the way “it” wants it - to adjust life to suit “it.” It is the analytical judging part of you that’s always trying to configure your reality to be more like you like it. It’s not, “I am.” That’s not ego that’s just an awareness of self. That’s not what we mean by ego. That, of course, is not a problem. You need to know who you are, and have an identity, and have a history; all that’s fine. Ego is an attachment to making things different in a way that it suits you better. The ego is, “I want”; “I need.” And yes, you can get rid of that. Ego is derived from fear. Fear is all about you. When you’re afraid, obviously, it’s about you. You’re afraid. Even if you say, “Well, I’m afraid for somebody else.” It’s still about you. When it’s about you it’s pointing at you. You’re focused on yourself. That’s why fear creates ego. It’s “self” focusing on how you manipulate the world to be more like you want it. And that is what’s not productive.

More here:
http://www.my-big-toe.com/forums/viewto ... 380#p75380

It’s possible that ego is behind this thought of
strangling ego.

I think accepting that we are assholes and shrugging
our shoulders, is closer to enlightenment than
striving for it.

I don’t know how you could be unegoic and have
any awareness of it.

The Shambala Buddhists strangle ego with The 100000
prostrations. It takes a long time.

Some Buddhist monks strangle ego by begging in the streets.

The Jewish rabbis strangle ego by getting married, which
I think is most effective ; - )

I think ego is diminished when you focus on connection
in your interaction, empathy for the other person, and disregard
for your own impressiveness.

First you fake it, assess the feedback, then
you get addicted to that soul level thrill.

This reminds me of the occasion of an important
Shambala monk visiting our centre and a dinner was
taking place, but everyone was very stiff and formal
being on best behaviour in front of the teacher.

He intentionally lets out a loud fart to break up the
ego fest. Things were much more relaxed after that.

_________________
Does this PMR make my butt look big?

I think humor can be a powerful tool. A joke a day keeps the ego at bay. :)

I think thoughtfully curated music and humour are calorie free nutrients
for the oversoul.

_________________
Does this PMR make my butt look big?

It makes me wonder why it is said that many kings of old kept a fool(joker) in their court. Did the tyrants also keep them? What is the difference between keeping a joker vs. fool vs. none at all? What are the advantages or disadvantages?

I think part of the puzzle is calibrating your
attention to direct life experience, and moving
away from fiction and myth, which may be
complete fabrications.

Observe the tyrants and old souls in <your>
playspace, observe their attitude to humour, and
the brand of humour, then assess that direct data.

My observation is that humour is scarce among
egoists, and when it does occur, it’s a brand of
passive aggression and laughing down at others
or glee of evil. We all slip into this of course.

The old soul laughs at himself or shares a laugh at
his group, self deprecating. Gaffigan is an example
of someone who makes fun of himself.

Anyway, even bad/entropic humour is a step toward
lightening up and starting to squeeze the
throat of ego.

_________________
Does this PMR make my butt look big?

I agree, but so many disregard the myths and fables as meaningless when they could be used as a tool of self reflection.
Yep.
Yep. Depending on intent.
The “devil”/ego can not stand to be mocked. Humor is a joyful way of recognizing it. Like Winnie said, “laugh and the world laughs with you, weep and you weep alone”. :)

I'm so glad this has morphed into a discussion about fun and playfulness because that is another interesting avenue to explore.

Tom talks somewhere of the propensity of NPMR beings to pull our legs and warns us against it . (Again apologies for not providing chapter and verse) As it happens, I have just been reading George Macdonald's "Phantastes" in which he describes the antics of these creatures. Shakespeare does it too in Midsummer Night's Dream with the character of Puck. I know this is all metaphorical and is not to be taken literally, but it tickles me to see these same ideas coming up time and time again. I just love it when things fall into place.

My yardstick of character is the ability to see the funny or at least whimsical side of any situation and not interpret things too literally. But yes there is a caveat: when does a "sense of humour" become cruel and self-serving?

My husband had a lovely way of dealing with my barbed tongue aimed at him: "You really shouldn't mock the afflicted. Report to my office after school for sex of the best"