← Back to Kinfonet

Is there a non-ego I?


I quit this forum because too many people were discussing about the sex of the angels (if you know what this expression means). Today I see that you are still discussing of the sex of the angels. Have better things to do in life.


When I read something that needs clarification, I ask for it, and in this forum where clarity is essential, there is nothing better to do.

Since you react to my questions about understanding “who are you” with ad hominem instead of a reasonable response, you’ve made it clear.

I strongly doubt that you were asking for clarification, (and this is part of self-knowledge), but you had a very precise and honest explanation from me. I cannot do anything if you don’t understand “to talk about the sex of the angel”.

You’re familiar with the reference and I’m not, and you “can’t do anything about it”?

There is a problem of different cultural background here. I thought this expressions was used in all western countries, but now I see that it’s not so.
You may find the explanation here:

This expressions has its origin in Middle age, if my memory is not wrong. All the great European theologians of Christianity, for centuries discussed about what was the sex of the angels without arriving at any agreement. How can you talk about something you don’t know?

Thanks for the clarification.

You say you left this forum because we weren’t talking about what mattered. I’d ask you to provide some examples, but I suspect there was some other reason.

Examples? What matters to you may not matter to me and viceversa. So it’s just a personal assessment for what it’s worth. Anyway we can take the initial post and question of this thread, and my initial reply to nobody meant exactly that - to talk about the existence of a non-ego I, is to deal with something with no importance, or “with no practical consequences for your everyday life” as the dictionary says. While to understand one’s phychological nature has a decisive practical consequence in our dayly life.

Some other reasons for my quitting? Sure. But it’s no use to talk about them here now. The main reason is simply that I felt the utter uselessness of discussing K.

But you thought to give it another chance? Do you still feel it’s useless?

Yes. I’ll try to explain what I mean.

To discuss K., or the problems of life, the way it’s done here is useless because there is no real delving into our mind, or to use an expression K. used, we don’t see the things we talk about in ourselves. It all stops at the intellectual level so no discovery is made. I think a forum, its “format” or atmosphere is something very far from the enquiry as K meant it. When K talked in Saanen or to a group of students, he meant that all the partecipants should try to “see” in themselves what he was saying in that precise moment (and not when one has gone back home). He called that also an “exploration” meaning one should explore one’s own mind and not accept what he was saying. This - he thought - was useful.

Reading your question I wanted to try if it was possible to have this exploration here. So I asked:

“Look what is implied in your question: we are not capable of conceiving a universe without ourselves, aren’t we?”

To see what is implied in your question one must do an exploration into oneself. Neither you or sivaram made this exploration. You only objected at my words - which is exactly what one is expected to do in forum. I’m not interested in a intellectual discussion.

1 Like

In the pursuit of exploring about self we tried to understand EGO, LOVE and other physical inabilities affecting the psychological structure of the person (In this thread). It is not about talking intellectually, if you are feeling some words are just conclusions, then just question on the point, directly. Such that opposite person will understand your intention.

I generally get many questions inside but I ask few of them in this forum. You can question, some one will definitely answer.

voyager, thanks for the explanation. Sorry you feel the discussions here are worthless. That’s a shame, I’m sure you could have brought a unique perspective to the mix. Take care!

I think most of us feel that way. As Krishnamurti (and others) have said, “there’s no getting there from here”, or something to that effect. The awakening of intelligence, the transformed brain, the end of ego, etc., is what-should-be for those who take the teachings seriously. But the conditioned brain isn’t free to explore the teachings until or unless it sees how its conditioning limits its capacity.

So if pondering and talking to each other about this situation does nothing more than bring greater awareness of our conditioned responses, it’s worthwhile.

There is no need to feel sorry, and surely it’s not a shame. If you understand that what you are doing is useless you change direction.

Last year I tried to bring a different perspective here, to eshtabilish a real dialogue, which implies a friendly relationship. But I failed and that’s another reason why I quit.

The problem here is complex and delicate and not so easy to solve. I’s not only a matter of indulging in a intellectual discussion, but there were more serious and destructive factors like dishonesty, lack of sincerity and the pursue of power.
This time I decided to try again because it seemed that you were a sincere person, so a dialogue was possible.

awareness is a strange thing and a most elusive one: just when one thinks to be aware one is not. One may think that he/she is doing a real exploration into one’s phyche while actually one is only operating at an intellectual level. It happens to everybody and therefore we cannot take anything for granted.

That is just what I have done, I have pointed out to you, directly and simply, that you had not explored your mind, your own psychological reactions and needs. This was evident from your reply: if you were really aware of yourself you would have known instantly that human beings don’t want to die (and not only phisically).

Why do some people do sucide?

I have explained to nobody above what are the conditions for having a useful or worthwhile conversation or dialogue (in the sense K used this word). So, yes, one can never be assolute in excluding this possibility. It depends on many factors, first of all the capacity one has to estabilish a good communication, to be in sync with the interlocutor and of course to observe oneself. I often don’t have those qualities and so I didn’t managed to have e real dialogue. I’m conditioned by the feeling I preceive in the interlocutor.

This is a good question. Do we want to tackle it intellectually or exploring ourselves?

There are a lot of explanations for this, psychologists are good to find them, do you need to know my own explanation? Do their explanations or mine have an impact in our life? Everybody can give an explanation, we all do that endelessly and things go on like before.

Now, can’t you know directly why YOU want to do suicide? Is that a problem which concerns you? If it does not concern you then you can only do intellectual speculations or repeat what others have said. While if you in your life have gone through some depressing times when things seemed so bad that you thought about suicide than you can have a real understanding of this matter.

My point is that “human beings don’t want to die”, is just a conclusion. Which you mentioned in the previous reply.

What was there in your mind, when you wrote the above statement?

I appreciate your directness.
To me it’s not a conclusion, it’s a fact. Something so evident like the computer I have in front of me.

Obviously if you don’t see this fact then it will seem a conclusion to you. So again we have stumbled upon the problem of doing a real work of exploring ourselves. Are we intertested? There could be a lot of reasons why one is not aware of himself/herself, the main one is the psychological resistence. Another one is that perhpas we are not grown enough. I don’t want to be intrusive but if I may ask you: how old are you?

In my mind there was the overwhelming presence of myself and the fact that I was perceiving the world around me. So the feeling that, if I’m not anymore there, there could not be any world too. I know intellectually that there are other creatures which will go on perceiving the world, but to me the world will no longer exist.