← Back to Kinfonet

The End of Dependence

“:…can one end, this morning, completely, one’s dependence on another? Dependence is part of one’s consciousness. The moment that ends, something new begins, obviously. But one never ends anything completely Can one see and end dependence and its consequences, psychologically, inwardly? See what it means to depend and the immediate action taking place of ending it.”
J. Krishnamurti, 11th Question, Ojai 2nd Q and A, 8th May, 1980

Are we aware of our dependence on Krishnamurti’s teaching? As he said above, “The moment that [dependence] ends, something new begins…one never ends anything completely and that non-ending is one’s hope.”

Do we really want to understand completely what Krishnamurti was trying to convey, or are we becoming experts on his teaching because that’s the change we want to bring about? Have the people most dedicated to understanding K’s teaching “got it”? Intellectually, yes. But actually, not at all.

They began their study of the teaching with the hope of grasping its meaning and intention, and they have achieved success and fulfilled that hope. Now they can help others achieve intellectual understanding of Krishnamurti’s teaching. But is intellectual understanding complete? If it was complete, Krishnamurti and his teaching wouldn’t be paramount anymore, and dependence on him would have ended.

1 Like

Whilst we’re working on our dependance, I’d just like to point out the obvious : the people posting here are suffering and confused to some degree - they’re humans. We may get upset during many of our interactions, but there is a very good chance that the other person is even more upset and confused than you are.
Please be careful - let he who is able to surrender, surrender first.

Remind us not to make you our General. :woozy_face:

1 Like

It exudes happiness of living in here !! :upside_down_face:

I don’t know if I should thank you for warning me because I don’t know what you think I’ve done or might do.

I don’t know if you’re joking - but my comment wasn’t directed specifically at you.
Our understanding is obviously affected by the self - meaning we take things personally, thus our understanding is not really understanding. The self colours perception, interpretation, delusion (aka knowledge/belief) and eventually colours itself and the world around it self.

Speaking of dependence : Identity is dependent on our knowledge. This is why claws and fangs are drawn, and emotions are high : it is a matter of life and death for the ego.

The same goes of course for our “understanding” of K - we have invested in it, we will not let it go easily, we depend on it, we shall defend it with dishonour.

K asks : can we end our dependence on another?

We are obviously social creatures with an inbuilt need to know where we stand in relation to each other when we interact. This is a filter that one might consider when it comes to dialogue: our animal conditioning is more concerned with social, hierarchical, emotional aspects of the relationship than the actual subject under discussion. (eg. Am I being respected? - this of course has important implications to our survival in the bush. Is the person I am dealing with an authority? this of course affects my decision to accept or reject what is being said, and whether I speak down or up to them. etc)

1 Like

And the animals seem to do pretty well with the ‘hierarchical’ order, alpha-males and such. Not so well with us…Is it our sense that we are ‘individuals’ that doesn’t allow for the acceptance that animals instinctually have for how the relationships among themselves are worked out?l

A few thoughts:
1)You may add zoology to the list of my non-speciality subjects.
2)All social animals bear the costs and benefits of their instinctive social structure - be that psychological or otherwise - being ostracised from the group, or occupying the lowest rung in the hierarchical structure is unhealthy for dogs or chimps or humans.
3)Comparison is a form of suffering and often misleading

This need or desire for “respect” (earned or not) is a hallmark of the ‘self-image’, isn’t it. We are ‘dependent’ on receiving it. It bolsters our ‘self-esteem’. Battered in chidhood, the self-esteem strives to protect itself against being hurt, deflated, etc.

1 Like

I respect this post for its simplicity and lack of obvious BS

So if ‘I’ am identified with the thinking process that produced the post, then ‘I’ would feel that ‘I’ had been ‘respected’ by dint of that identification. But the post it seems produced itself so there’s no one but thought itself , then, to be ‘respected’ or not…and it really doesn’t mind either way.

I see it as you describe it Dan . Good inquiry both of you. This is true and observable. It is an important process to observe and understand. The self have many faces.

1 Like

Yes many, and except for when we are in a sound sleep, we are always ‘posing’ as the ‘observer’ aren’t we? The separate ‘me’ looking out on it all…Then along comes K. and says “The observer is the observed”.

I wasn’t joking, and your disquisition on the self doesn’t address the need to know what you’re warning against.

I’m just participating in the discussion on the human condition with all you folks - I have no special knowledge of the specific things going on in each individual’s head - if there is a warning, its merely a friendly compassionate warning that we are all human beings with all the suffering that that involves. I saw your post on Dependence as a chance to address the suffering and confusion particular to this forum - which luckily is the same suffering and confusion of humanity as a whole.

1 Like

Or if there is no separation between thinker and thought - its all me - then that would explain why I’m so proud of myself for being so damned clever?

Is it where , as Dan says, I separate myself from my thoughts, identified myself with it as an observer separate from the observed, and take plaisure, or proudness from it ? And then I am hurt if someone reject it , or show lack of respect or ridicule it ? Just asking. This feeling of being hurt…do we know it ?Isn’t it the self that is hurt ?

1 Like

Can we try to be even simpler ? that might help. There are a lot of : if this, and then this, so if so this - too many steps. It reminds me of my faceook friends saying : They (the government? the reptilians?) are trying to separate us - in order to divide and conquer. When in fact there is no need for “they” or “trying” or “us” in the equation.

Self is separation.

Now there are those that think that thought does not arise from self. So we’ll probably have to go over that again.

Right. “It’s all me”. The ‘thinker is the thought’, proud, clever, whatever. The ‘self’ image / thought, creates the sensation of an observer apart from what is being observed…It is the self image that inflates with pride over its ‘cleverness’ and deflates , suffers, when things don’t go the way it wishes, when it is exposed to be false, hypocritical, etc. It has a stake in being considered worthy of respect. That it has some ‘value’, some ‘significance’, etc. which it doesn’t. It actually doesn’t exist, does it?

1 Like