Dear Dhammadarsa [Darsa] Bhikkhu

>
>In modern terminology and reflecting on my practice, greed, hatred and
>delusion, the ending of which is called Nibbaana, is the same as "ego" [as
>in egotistic] rather than "self". At times I experience an impermanent self
>that has no greed, hatred and delusion - no ego. At those times I am working
>towards the benefit of myself and others, not just myself. In the
>consideration of "myself and others", there is a self and others and the
>Buddha taught that the wholesome that we should develop [kusalassupasampada a
>Dhammapada v 183] is defined as not harming oneself and, or others.
>
>Hindu/Brahmin philosophy tries to merge [or obliterate] these, thinking that
>the distinction is the cause of suffering, but that was not accepted or
>taught by the Buddha. The ending of the distinction occurs in the first
>formless state of meditation [aruupa-jhaana] and the Buddha made very clear
>that the formless states were not necessary for enlightenment.

KO:  the wrong thinking that there is a self arise because there is miccha ditthi.  Ego is mana, another dhamma.  When you experience no greed, hatred or delusion is not a impermanent self, it is panna that arise that understand anatta.   If there is a miccha ditthi arise, panna cannot arise, they are exclusive.  If oet think there is no permanent self, it is panna that understands and not otherwise.  When you are  thinking of benefiting others, it is dana or karuna, and it could arise with or without panna. 

One must be distinct and clear on the dhamma that arise so there is no confusion in the application in our daily lifes or the development of the path one taken to practise


thanks
ken O