← Back to Kinfonet

The self :: A dialogue

The goal here is to have a dialogue (all are invited) that explores the self and follows the notion of dialogue that Krishnamurti put forth:

“A dialogue is very important. It is a form of communication in which question and answer continues till a question is left without an answer. Thus the question is suspended between two persons involved in this answer and question. It is like a bud with untouched blossoms. If the question is left totally untouched by thought, it then has its own answer because the questioner and answerer, as persons, have disappeared. This is a form of dialogue in which investigation reaches a certain point of intensity and depth, which then has a quality which thought can never reach. It is not a dialectical investigation of opinions, ideas, but rather exploration by two or many serious, good brains.”

“In dialogue, we can discover the need to completely set aside our personal conditioning—to die to our own beliefs and formulated experiences—making it possible to see in that unique mirror of relationship the whole truth of “what is”. Then, if we share in the same spirit of inquiry, intensity and affection, we may actually find ourselves “thinking together”—not necessarily agreeing or disagreeing but, seeing, understanding and, thereby sharing as one the same reality.”

“In exploring the limitations of our conditioning, perhaps together we will be able to create a new culture, spontaneously and effortlessly, in which we can live with sensitivity, insight and love. The first step, which is really the last step, is to willingly surrender, or suspend, what we know to be our old ways of thinking and feeling, which separate us from life as it actually is.”

What does ‘the self’ mean, what does it point to?

You wanted to jump into the abyss of the unknown? Eh? (I’m quoting a quote dr Anderson referred in a conversaton with K: to jump into the abyss with empty hands, that is not holding to our knowledge. Well let’s see what will happen…

Suppose I have no idea of what a self is, how would you start this exploration?
I am what I am, do I need someone else to tell me who I am? :slightly_smiling_face:

1 Like

Nice topic, we can speak some aspects of self in this thread.

Self is nothing but the content of our consciousness, I think.

Please share your view

The “I”, is same but the situations and conditioning are different, which makes the personality. Therefore, asking this question is of no use I think.

please share your view

I would start by sharing the powerful and pretty much constant feeling I have of ‘ownership’ … My body, my mind, my life, my journey, my thoughts, my emotions, my imagination, my perceptions, my observations, my theories, my practice, my views. Mine mine mine!

Then I would ask: What is going on here? Who is this ‘my?’ What is it, really?

A good start indeed, I’d add: my actions. The ego is almost active all the time in us so it’s bound to manifest in every occasion, more so in this forum. So another good start could be: How can I know that my ego or some else ego is acting now? Or in other words: do I need to have a definition of the ego to be able to spot it? My answer is no. I think I have a nose for it, the ego stinks! (I’m not the author of this expression, I took it from a Zen story). So my question is: can we sniff the ego?
This brings the discussion off the intellectual level.

I’m assuming you mean by ‘ego’ the Mine! Mine! Mine! I spoke of, yes?

Can we sniff this primal feeling of ownership, of mineness?

Yes, definitely. Unless perhaps one utterly identifies with it, so much so that it becomes invisible.

Suppose we manage to define exactly and beautiful what the ego is, do you think that this will prevent the people here to continue to nurture their ego and to think they are above the others? Does the definition of the ego prevents you to try to find gratification? Look around and you will see some good people doing just that and yet they know perfectly what an ego is. One should have the nose for the ego, one must be capable to sniff wherever it is, in others but better in oneself.

I am no different from others, ego is the same for everyone. I don’t think definitions will free the self from its nature.

After listening to Jiddu, I see that there are no good and bad people around me. Jiddu said knowledge should not be used of understanding peoples psychology.

For that one should be honest to one self, such that self awareness will arise.

Hope my reply is sensible.

Yes, of course. But also the ego which thinks that he is generous, altruist. “I dedicate my life to help the poors… and so on”

Well, if it causes mischief it means it’s real. A shadow does not exist in itself (it’s only the the effect of a screened light, and yet it’s something we can take shelter in in a hot summer day.)

But yes, I think what you said could have a base. If I’m completely identified with the self I can hardly spot it. Umm… this could be a good explanation why some people are not aware of when their ego is in action.

(I cannot continue this conversation today, because it’s bed time for me.)

Schlaf gut, until tomorrow then.

Hi friends

I am having a simple question.

Does emotion always involve behavior?

Please share your views, if interested. :slight_smile:

I don’t know about always, but I’d say that emotion often affects behavior, moves it in a certain direction, gives it a tone and feel. Why do you ask?

Because, it is related to self. I thought it is relevant to ask such question.

I feel that, in our behavior there is emotion hiding underneath. I am not completely sure about it, but the self awareness of our emotional state is important, I think. Do you agree?

Yes, it does but not the same way for everyone. Have you noticed?

How important the character is in our emotional reactions?

Please share your view :slight_smile:

Yes, particularly when the emotions are capable of causing suffering.

I’m not sure what you mean by character?

personality or “psychological structure” (I generally use)

hope you understood the point.

The self can definitely cause mischief. Or perhaps more accurately: Belief that the self is a real enduring independent entity that is in charge of the body-mind can cause mischief.

Character (personality or psychological structure) can definitely color emotions. But there are probably primal emotions that manifest in a similar way for different characters. My nobody character influences how I experience existential fear. And your sivaram character influences your experience of existential fear. But, no matter how different our characters might be, our experiences of existential fear are likely to be similar, if not essentially the same. (If existential fear is alien to you, replace it with a different common emotion.)


Your understanding is sensible, I agree with that but my question is different. Go through my question once more.

How “IMPORTANT” the character is in our emotional reactions?

(I think we are having meaningful dialouge :slight_smile: )