12 Oct 2016
Shri Kartik asked:
1) Some people in this world have the ability to dream in a lucid manner. That is to say, they are aware of the fact that they are dreaming and in turn, successfully control their dream environment to a certain level. Lucid dreaming is a phenomenon that has also been proved scientifically in recent times.
My question to You is this - is it important for a soul to be aware of its dream state while sleeping (such a state is possible with constant practice, as suggested by some researchers)?
[One of the benefits of such a state is that the soul can immediately snap out of worldly dreams and try to change its focus towards God. I say this because I face the problem of being attracted to worldly things in my dreams. This is possibly to do with my subconscious mind, which is still drawn towards worldly attractions. Throughout the day, I try to immerse myself in Your thoughts, but come night-time, I fall back into the lure of worldly attractions. I feel that If I were to learn the art of lucid dreaming, I could direct my attention towards Your teachings even in my dreams. Please explain, Swami.]
Swami replied: There are two types of dreams: i) day-dream or lucid dream, which is just an imagination without sleep that causes ignorance of the reality. ii) Sleep dream is the dream that is created by certain thoughts where the dreamer is captured by ignorance and is fully controlled by the dream due to ignorance of the reality.
i) I don’t like to call the first type as dream since it is only your imagination and the whole imaginary world is created, controlled and even can be dissolved by you at any time whenever you like. This is the state of the God involved with the world and in this state God is called as Eshwara. Self-awareness along with equally strong self-ignorance that creates the imaginary world co-exists. However, the self-awareness prevails over the self-ignorance and hence the entire imaginary world is absolutely under your control. You are allowing the ignorance to have the equal strength so that you are entertained with the imaginary world. ii) In the night dream, you lose self-awareness and self-ignorance alone remains. Hence, you are overcome by your self-ignorance induced by sleep. In this sleep-dream, you are not creator, controller and destroyer of any item of the dream. This dream is also a world of imaginations only and is as good as the imaginary world in the awaken state. The creator, controller and destroyer of the sleep-dream is the bundle of thoughts stored in your memory (chittam). This memory at the surface level is full of thoughts of this birth only. The deep level of this memory (called as sub-conscious state) is full of very strong thoughts retained by the memory during past several births. This sub-conscious state contains very few thoughts only but those thoughts are as strong as diamonds. This sub-conscious state decides the real behaviour of the soul. The memory in the surface level contains many thoughts, but, no thought is strong. The state of consciousness (surface level) may receive a point from the preacher. If the opposite point is in the sub-conscious state, the practice will be as per the sub-conscious state only. These strong diamonds in the sub-conscious state are called as samskaras or vaasanas. If the samskara is congenial to the preaching received, the preaching is immediately implemented in the practice. If samskara is opposite and still if you want to implement the preaching received, you have to strengthen the preaching by constant memory so that your samskara gets defeated by the preaching present in your surface-conscious level. Receiving the concept from the preacher is called as ‘Shravana’ (hearing), continuous memory of the concept is called as ‘Manana’ (constant recollection) and the concept becoming samskara by accumulation of strength is called as ‘Nididhyaasa’ (solidification of the concept as firm decision). The Veda says about these three stages one after the other (shrotavyo, mantavyo, nididhyaasitavyah).
It is not possible to maintain awareness of real world in the sleep-dream. The brain and nervous system start taking rest. Three stages result: a) The first stage in which the contact of awareness with the consciousness (surface level) is cut and hence you will not remember anything about yourself or the external real world and this is the first state of sleep called as ‘Svaapa’ (sleep), b) By the first state, the brain and nervous system are taking 50% rest since the process of resting is a gradual set-up due to the presence of 50% activity of the nervous system and brain. The sub-conscious state gets linked with the awareness. Due to loss of conscious state from the physical body in external world, the ‘I’ (basic ego) becomes very weak and is no more a controller of the imaginary word governed by the sub-conscious state. By this, the weak ‘I’ is controlled by the dream. This is the second stage called ‘Swapna’ (dream state). c) This is final third state in which the link between awareness with real world and sub-conscious state is also cut. The reason for such total cut of surface and deep levels of consciousness is the total disappearance of awareness since the nervous system and brain enter in to total 100% rest. This final state is called as ‘Sushupti’ or deep sleep. The first ‘Svaapa’ state is not considered by scholars since the awareness is in touch with a part of consciousness still. Therefore, the first state and second state come under one category only called Swapna. Before second state, the awareness is in touch with the real world, physical body and surface level of the consciousness, which is called as awaken state or ‘Jaagrut. As soon as the awareness is delinked from these three (real world, physical body and surface-conscious state), the second ‘Swapna’ state starts immediately. Due to the absence of time gap between Jaagrut and Swapna state, the preliminary Svaapa state gets included in the secondary Swapna state only. By this, you get three states only called as Jaagrut, Swapna and Sushupti. Sleep (Svaapa) starts from the second Swapna state.
If you observe the two conscious and sub-conscious levels of consciousness, there is no heterogeneity since only homogeneity exists. This means that the final decision and practical behaviour is always according to the influence of sub-conscious state only in which solidified diamonds radiate their lights into the upper surface level of consciousness. Due to this, even if some concept is received by the upper conscious level, the inner diamonds decide finally in the decision to enter into practice. If the introduced concept is in phase with the inner diamonds, the implementation of the concept is immediate. If the diamonds oppose the concept, concept gets defeated and only the diamonds (samskaras) decide the implementation. Hence, there is homogeneity in the behaviour of soul in both awaken and dream state. There is no contradiction between both these states since the soul is in the same influence of the qualities strengthened from several births. This nature of strong samskaras is called as prakruti and nobody can overcome it by any effort as said in the Gita (prakrutim yaanti...). Unless very powerful spiritual knowledge is introduced and subsequently strengthened by recollection, this prakruti (inherent nature) cannot change.
Now, let us distinguish these three states clearly before answering your question. The three states are: 1) Jaagrut state (awaken): In this state the consciousness or awareness is in touch with the external world in which the ‘I’ is associated with the entire body and linked to items nearby. The meaning of ‘I’ in this state has enormous value of energy, which includes the entire gross body. Before this energy of such ‘I’, the entire energy of the imaginary world (nervous energy) is an ant before elephant. Hence, the ‘I’ in the awaken state has full control on the imaginary world. 2) Swapna state (dream in sleep): The ‘I’ in this state is detached from the external world and hence naturally is detached from the physical body, which is an item of the external world. Now, the ‘I’ is associated with an imaginary form of the imaginary world and is a leg of the ant. The ant-leg is always controlled by the ant. In the awaken state, this ant (entire imaginary world) is controlled by the ‘I’ associated with physical body, which is like an elephant. The ‘I’ in the awaken state is an elephant whereas the same ‘I’ in dream state is leg of an ant. Hence, the ‘I’ (elephant) controls the entire imaginary world in awaken state and the same ‘I’ (leg of an ant) is controlled by dream state (ant). Of course, the ‘I’ in awaken state (elephant) is a tiny part of the real world and hence is controlled by the real world. Our subject here is limited to ‘I’ in the real world, ‘I’ in the imaginary world in awaken state and ‘I’ in dream state. If the real world is elephant, the ‘I’ in the real world is the leg of the elephant. The entire imaginary world in awaken state is an ant before the leg of elephant (‘I’ in real world). But, the same ‘I’ in dream state becomes the leg of an ant. The imaginary world in both awaken and dream states remains as the same ant only. 3) Sushupti state (deep sleep): Here, the entire awareness is put off since the nervous system and brain take total rest. The ‘I’, a mode of awareness, is neither connected to the real world nor connected to the imaginary world.
Now, let us take your question. The deep sleep is essential for the brain because it needs rest due to high value of its work. The other systems in body like heart, kidneys etc., can continuously work and such work is mechanical and inert. In spite of so much rest, the brain consumes 20% oxygen inhaled. Therefore, in view of perfect health, you shouldn’t touch this third state called Sushupti (you should not disturb this state by bringing awareness in to it). Your question swings between 1 and 2 states only. You want to make the second state (Swapna) as the first state (Jaagrut). You can’t argue that even in awaken state, the external world can be cut by closing your eyes without entering in to sleep. In this state also, you are said to be actually in the awaken state only and your ‘I’ is still a leg of elephant because it is associated with the physical body only. Unless you are cut from this real external world, the dream state of sleep can’t start. When the second state doesn’t start, you are existing in the first state only with open or closed eyes. You say that you want to bring the first state (awareness of dreamer regarding his physical state and the external world) into second state (ignorance of dreamer regarding his physical state and external world), is it not madness? Can you bring light in to darkness while maintaining darkness in the room simultaneously? When the light comes in to the room the darkness runs away. Hence, either you have first state (light) or the second state (darkness). You can’t have first state in the second state, which needs co-existence of both states. If I say that a stone is in water, both stone and water should co-exist. It is utter foolishness if any preacher told you that you can continue your awareness in the sleep dream. You can continue your awareness in the awaken state while imagining your imaginary world (Lucid dream). As long as you continue awareness with the physical body and the real external world, the first state (Jaagrut) is only continuing and second stage (sleep-dream) does not exist as long as the first stage exists.
Dream is said to be central state between awaken state and state of deep sleep. In this state, the link with external real world and your physical body is cut followed by the awareness linked to sub-conscious level that creates dreams according to the pattern of samskaras. This dream state, characterised by such creation of dream is also used by the God to convey a message to you. This is explained in the ‘Brahma Sutra’ (Sandhye srushtiraahahi).
No Change in Love of Real Devotee to God Even If Miracle Not Exhibited
2) In one of Your messages, You have said that logic should used to find the address of the human incarnation. However, after the human incarnation been identified, logic must be discarded and firm faith should be developed.
On the other hand, in another message, You have also said that any statement coming from You needs to be thoroughly analyzed to see if it comes from the human being-component or the God-component. According to You, anything said by God will always pass the fire of analysis while a statement uttered by the soul-component may turn out to be wrong.
How do I correlate both these statements? Should I use the viewpoints of dvaita and advaita as and when required? Finally, does this apply to devotees of only lower levels? As You’ve mentioned before, devotees of the highest level consider You to be God incarnate at all times. Meaning, that they see only the God-component in the human incarnation.
Swami replied: The human incarnation is the human being component with which the energetic incarnation containing unimaginable God gets merged. Such human being is the real human incarnation. You have to distinguish the real human incarnation from false human incarnation by not mere separable jewels (miracles), but, by the inseparable beauty and colour of the body, which are spiritual knowledge and love to the real devotees to such extent that God (human incarnation) suffers the fruits of sin to relieve the devotee from sin. Along with the features and colour of personality, the jewels also exist. A king is recognized by the features and colours of his personality (photo identity) and also the crown and jewels (miracles). Sometimes, the king may remove crown and jewels in presence of a prostitute, who always shows love for the jewels only. A real heroine, who loved the king due to his personality, but, not due to the associated jewels and wealth of kingdom, can see the king even with crown and jewels since her looks are never on jewels and wealth. The king removes jewels in the presence of a prostitute, but wears the jewels in presence of the real heroine. Similarly, God doesn’t mind to exhibit miracles before real devotees, but, fears to exhibit miracles before selfish devotees. Even if the miracle is not exhibited, there is no change in the love of real devotee to God.
None can see God-component in human incarnation separately filtered from the human being component since both God and human being are merged with each other homogeneously appearing as the human being component only in the name of human incarnation. Yes. I told that you should analyse even the real human incarnation by sharp analysis because you can’t recognize the very real human incarnation without the analysis! Therefore, naturally, the analysis stands before the recognition of the real human incarnation. ‘A human incarnation should not be analysed’ means that the human incarnation decided by the analysis already, need not be analysed again and again. You should check every note by machine to decide which note is genuine and which note is fake. After testing, you have accepted a bundle of genuine notes. What I said here is that the bundle of genuine notes (already tested and decided by you as genuine notes) need not be tested again and again. If you test, test, test and test the same genuine note again and again wasting all your time in testing only, you can’t enjoy the note by spending it for some good purpose. Hence, sharp analysis should be in the beginning itself. When a real king and a false king (actor in the dress of king) appear before you, you can’t distinguish them by the external dress and jewels (miraculous powers), which are common to both. You have to analyse the difference between the personalities (actual photo identity) and then decide who real king is. Testing of every note is always recommended in the first stage itself because you don’t know which note is genuine and which note is fake. What I told means only re-testing of the note already tested.
When I told that I should be also tested, it refers only to the fresh devotees and not to old devotees, who have accepted Me after testing already. Lord Krishna said Arjuna to test whatever told by Him (the Gita) because Arjuna was not a real devotee, though was relative. Hence, the Lord told Arjuna to analyse the Gita. But, the Lord never said Radha or Gopikas to analyse Him. This statement does not apply to old devotees and applies to new devotees only. Moreover, testing Me means testing My knowledge and not conducting any medical test to see whether I am fit for the job medically or not! Even the old devotees can continue testing of My knowledge any number of times because “why should I fear when notes are genuine”. Only when the notes are not genuine, the person objects testing. This is how the blind traditions have fooled even the wise scholars! Testing the logic of the interpretation of scripture, which was given by an older human being, need not be objected as if it is testing the very scripture itself! The interpretation given by some human beings like Me in the older generations, is not the real interpretation of the scripture unless it is tested in the fire logic. Traditional fools object our analysis of the older interpretation of the scripture given by a human being like Me declaring that such interpretation is the real interpretation and such older human being was the actual God, who composed the scripture! The analysis of the older interpretation need not show that all the older interpretations are wrong. Many of them may be right and few of them may be wrong. By the analysis, I am trying to find out the real interpretation of the scripture, which is the heart of the author of scripture or God. Hence, subjecting My knowledge to the analysis every time by everybody is recommended by Me. I only advise not to go on repeating the same analysis of the same concept again and again in view of the conservation of limited valuable time. In fact, you can question My knowledge for the sake of the world so that the answer should come from My moth with better logic and authorities for the welfare of the world (even though you know the answer already). Arjuna was sage Nara questioning sage Narayana (God) in the Gita for the sake of the devotees, who get such doubts in the future (even though Arjuna does not have that doubt and knows the answer clearly).
3) I will be frank with You Swami. I used to have the bad habit of stealing from my childhood itself. During my teenage years, because of the company that I maintained, this habit intensified. At that time, I stole a large amount of money from a bag at home. Because of this, a certain person who had delivered the bag of money was accused of theft. As he was an employee at that time, his salary (corresponding to the amount stolen) was cut by my family. Even then, I never confessed.
As the years passed, I started to repent for my sin and felt guilty about another person suffering for what I did. I always thought that I should pay back the same money to him after I earned it myself. Eventually, I stopped stealing altogether due to God’s grace.
Today, I’ve started earning my own money and I’ve saved up enough to repay the person who suffered a loss due to my act of stealing. My question to You is this:
Should I repay the same person from whom I stole the money? Or should I donate the same money for a deserving spiritual cause as a sacrifice to God? I should add that this person was also corrupt. He had on many occasions made money for himself in a crooked manner. It has been many years since I’ve even seen the person and I don’t know whether or not he’s changed for the better. Please give me Your divine guidance on this matter.
Swami replied: The solution to be arrived in your case is with big complexity. If you have stolen the money from your house, it is basically a sin. But, there is no actual financial loss for your family since the money was not enjoyed by the outsider. But, the stealing is, yet, a sin. But, if the money stolen by you was spent for a good purpose for which your people are not giving to you due to their ignorance, there is no sin in such stealing. How you have spent that money decides the whole case. Cheating some body for a good purpose, which can never be understood by that person, is not a sin. The mutual cancellation of two negatives is the result here. Let us leave the way of expenditure of that money to decide whether sin is committed or not because you have not told the way of its expenditure. Apart from this, another sin resulted because some innocent fellow was punished by your family. This is the sin tripled (basic sin of stealing, the way of expenditure is not justified and an innocent fellow was punished). Now, you say that the innocent fellow is also a wrong fellow earning money in unlawful ways. If so, the return of money to him is not justified. Therefore, the total sin committed in these three steps gets cancelled by a double edged knife. One edge is the proper expenditure of that stolen money for a good purpose and the second edge is that the punished fellow is really unworthy of return. Everywhere, you should apply the sharp analysis whether it is the knowledge of pravrutti or the knowledge of Nivrutti.
4) ‘Do not criticize anybody’ - Does this statement apply only in Nivrutti or should it be adhered to in pravrutti as well?
Swami replied: Jesus told “hate the sin but not the sinner”. You can criticize the point presented by anybody including God in human form. God will not mistake you for criticizing His point and He will make it more clear to you by further answer. Arjuna told Krishna that He is confusing him by mixing the two opposite points (Vyaamishrenaiva...). Arjuna is criticizing the lack of clarity in the answer of Krishna. Actually, Arjuna understood the point of Krishna clearly since Krishna gave the answer to the level of Arjuna. But, he is saying like this to mean only that ordinary people of lower level get confused if further clarity is not given. Arjuna is standing on behalf of ordinary people and is placing this question. This only means requesting Krishna to tell the same point with more clarity for the sake of ordinary people, who get confused easily due to lack of capability of deep logic in understanding. I often tell My devotees to criticize My knowledge from the point of the view of ordinary people so that I can answer to their level also. I know that as a learned person, you have understood My point. But, still you are criticizing My point from the level of common people to get answer for their level. When you criticize the point of somebody, your anger is only on the wrong point but not on the speaker of that point. If you are jealous of the speaker with your ego getting hurt, since your point is not standing before the analysis of other side, one should not take the criticism of the point as the criticism of speaker. Similarly the criticism of speaker can’t be criticism of his point. Suppose you say a speaker 1) “don’t speak now anymore since your fever is very high” and also say to another speaker 2) “don’t speak now anymore since your point is already established as wrong”. Is there no difference between these two statements? In (1) the speaker is criticized for his illness and there is no criticism of his point and in (2) the point of the speaker is criticized and not the speaker at all.
Generally, in the debates, people feel that they are personally criticized if their points are criticized. The speaker identifies with his point and feels that he and his point are one and the same like God and human being merged becomes the one human incarnation only. In the case of human incarnation, suppose, you praise the God component while beating the human being component, both praise and beating go to one component only, which is called as God in the form of human being since both are homogeneously merged with each other. In the same way, did the speaker and point spoken by him get merged with each other, so that if the point is criticized, the speaker is criticized? In fact, I should be very thankful to the other side person, who corrected My point and I get benefited by the correct point. Discussion is only for searching the right point so that both get benefited by the right point. The conclusion may prove that 1) My point is right by which both of us are benefited or 2) the point of the opponent is right by which both of us are benefited or 3) points of both of us are wrong and during discussion a third new point, which is right appeared by which both of us are benefited or 4) Both points of us are right without contradiction if understood in different angles of receivers and both of us are benefited by both these points since we both are in different angles only. Hence, there is no point of personal success and personal defeat in the debate since the point of a person is not a registered property like house in his name so that if the house damaged, the house owner is much hurt. Unless this background develops in the world, the preaching of God through even thousand human forms becomes futile since due to ego and jealousy, we always try to criticize the points of others and we feel that we are defeated if our points are proved wrong by the criticism from the opponent.
In pravrutti, criticism is very essential especially on some occasions and in some contexts. Sometimes, your friend or your disciple may rectified by your criticism, if expressed in a polite and sweet manner without anger and loud voice (which is called as shouting). You must project the truth by your argument in a palatable way and condemning the opposite point should be done in sweet manner. Hence, both truth and pleasant presentation are recommended (Satyam bruuyaat, priyam bruuyaat...).
Criticism of human incarnation is different from criticism of the spiritual knowledge spoken by It. You may not accept Krishna as God but still accept whatever was spoken by Krishna and develop spiritually continuing your worship to Rama only. Unfortunately, Rama did not speak any Gita. Hence, you can assume that the Gita spoken by Krishna is actually the Gita spoken by Rama. You may also develop a story that since Krishna was a thief, Krishna stole the Gita of Rama and claimed Himself to be its author! The saying came that we must do what Rama did and what Krishna preached us. Your liking for Rama is due to your strict adherence to Pravrutti only. You have no idea of Nivrutti to understand Krishna as God testing sages born as Gopikas in their three worldly bonds, which are with money (butter), issues and life partner. You must also know that Krishna did this test only for sages in Nivrutti and didn’t perform this test in the case of any human being following Pravrutti strictly, for which alone Rama came as incarnation. Krishna came for Pravrutti as in the case of Pandavas and also for Nivrutti as in the case of Gopikas. You need not criticise the Gita because you don’t like Krishna. Personal liking and disliking should not influence your mind while reading the spiritual knowledge spoken by a person. Your liking and disliking is personal but your criticism of spiritual knowledge of a disliked person is not personal since the knowledge is for the welfare of entire humanity. Based on your disliking, if you criticise the Gita and find unreal faults, you are harming the entire humanity for which you will be punished severely.
5) Please explain the meaning of the mantra, ‘Om Purnamadah Purnamidam’.
Also, someone on the internet has asked the following question - Is the meaning of the Sanskrit shloka Om Purnamadah Purnamidam very similar to the continuum theory?
Swami replied: Puurnam means completeness. This is different from continuity as in the case of propagation of energy as continuous waves, which is different from the quantised theory of energy. Completeness is different from continuity. Continuity may be endless, but, completeness has the end. This verse in the Veda indicates the completeness of unimaginable God by division. When God enters in to various incarnations simultaneously, each incarnation is getting complete God since God is not divided by the division. The completeness is not halved by both the incarnations. God remains as complete God even though He completely enters into each medium (incarnation). This is the explanation of the unimaginable nature, which is beyond worldly logic as said in the Gita (Avibhakktam vibhakteshu...). Some people say that zero is the meaning of the word puurnam since zero subtracted from zero also remains as zero only. Zero is the meaning of word ‘shuunyam’ and not ‘puurnam’. Puurnam is the absolute reality, which is unimaginable. Shuunyam is unreal and there is no unimaginable addition or subtraction or multiplication or division because in the case of zero all these four processes also become unreal. In the case of unimaginable reality, all these four activities are real and the results are unimaginable.
I will give two examples for real ‘puurnam’ and unreal ‘shuunyam’. In one festival, Bhagavan Shri Satya Sai Baba started giving saris to about 100 female devotees. A row of 5 saris one above the other is kept by His side. As He gives the upper sari, the total number of five is maintained even after removing 100 saris from the 5 saris! This is unimaginable miracle happening in the plane of reality and is represented by the word Puurnam. Suppose, the same miracle happens in your dream. Even though you give the saris to 100 ladies and the 5 saris are maintained constant, you do not have the miraculous power since such incident is explained by the unreality of dream itself and your pseudo-miraculous power is not needed here. Here, the total dream is unreal and thus the explanation of this false miracle in the dream is logically given. It is no more miracle because the logic (that such thing can happen in unreal dream) is given. Once the logic explains the incident, it is no more a real miracle. This false miracle in the unreal dream stands for ‘Shuunyam’. But, in the case of Baba, the same incident happened in the real world. This miracle is not supplied with any logical explanation as there is no need for it and this miracle stands for puurnam.
6) Is a good deed done for the wrong reason still a good deed? In other words, when the intention is wrong but the end result turns out to be right, can the act still be considered as good?
Swami replied: Intention by itself is of not much sin since it is only in theoretical phase. A sin retained as intention only without action has very little punishment. But, theory is source of action. Since the action is always as per the intention, the intention gains value. If you plan a murder and employed some people for it, the intention is yours and action is of those people. Here, you are more punished since they have done mechanically as per your intention only. If you have beaten somebody with cruel intention and if your beating accidentally rectified some dislocation problem, is it sin or not? It is certainly a sin because the rectification of dislocation was accidental by the will of God and not by your will. Suppose you beat some part leading to dislocation, it is 100% full sin. Since the result cured some dislocation already existing and the result is not in your intention, the sin is 99%. This 99% becomes 100% if you start feeling pained for the failure of your intention. But, if you feel happy that your intention did good for that person, repent for your intention and action and don’t repeat such things in your life, the sin becomes 0%. As long as strong realization doesn’t take place, no sin becomes nil. If you have started repenting for your wrong intention and started feeling happy for the good result, the sin is slowly decreasing and reaches 0, if you don’t repeat that sin again in your entire life. Past is always cancelled if you rectified your present and continue your rectification in future also. The punishment of sin is not for the past with vengeance, but, to avoid such sin in the present and future. Hence, you should never worry about your past sins. You should worry about your past sins only to repent and rectify the sin in the present and in the future. Recollection of memory of sin is waste if this rectification is not achieved.
7) The word 'ego' is interpreted in different ways by different people. In general, Westerners have a very different view of the ego as compared to Indians. From what I've observed, the meaning of this word changes from context to context. Please give some clarity on the word 'ego' and how it needs to be interpreted by someone on the spiritual path.
Swami replied: Ego is used in two senses in spiritual knowledge: 1) Basic meaning of ‘I’ representing your whole personality including your body. This is representation of naturally existing state and this is not wrong at all. 2) Ego is used in the sense of pride that is developed by one or many factors like age, beauty, colour, knowledge, wealth, issues, life partner, caste, gender etc. This is wrong sense since this leads to sins.
We have to use this word as per the context specifying the meaning of the word ego every time so that misunderstanding of one sense for the other is avoided.
★ ★ ★ ★ ★