A Unique Expression of Love from the media Journey through Grief

A woman asks, in reference to life, 'What is it that moves and leads the show? What is this energy?' Rupert responds that ultimately it cannot be defined or named, nor is it necessary to. We might call it God, infinite being, but these are provisional names according to the moment. Best to leave it unnamed.

A woman says that ever since her mom died forty years ago, she has been looking for her mother. Rupert talks about a children’s book he loves called, ‘Are You My Mother’. It’s a beautiful story of the soul separated from its divine mother. Rupert suggests that is her journey: she has been on a search all these years for her and now she’s been returned home.

A man describes the process he went through after his wife died: a terrible grief that eventually become one love, or our love, from which he took solace. Rupert says there is nothing he could add to the beautiful description.

A woman shares an experience related to the meditation that morning, in which Rupert was talking about coming home and the absolute. She relays how it reminded her of when her father fell. She was in France and flew back in time for her to see him while he was still conscious and he said, ‘Thank you for coming home.'

A woman says she has been living with the idea of fate because she has a genetic predisposition to cancer. She notices that she diminishes life as a protective or pre-emptive mechanism against the fear of death. Rupert responds that it reminds him of his son, who used to not show care that he cared about his exams, so that he didn't feel badly if he failed. He points out that this kind of diminishment defence is a false security. Your purpose is to abide in and as your true nature. Everything in life is an aid to that singular purpose.

A man relays his experience of listening to a Beethoven piece in the morning meditation. He felt it in his body and mind, which felt cleansing. Rupert reiterates that he felt we were all being washed in it. The man asks if Rupert would be willing to share his playlist. Rupert says that he is working on that, as well as reading list.

A man says that he has slowly been trying to share this understanding and teaching with his dad, and his father responds by saying, ‘I’m not ready now’. Rupert suggests that that response implies that he knows what you are referring to, which is a recognition and is beautiful.

A woman asks for an elaboration on the idea that everything happens for a reason. Rupert uses the analogy of a rubber ball that is compressed. That's what we are, contractions of infinite being, a tension that is always tending to return to its natural state. It shows up as the desire for happiness or an artist's desire for beauty. Infinite being is pulling us to return. Rupert says that God is an improv jazz musician, there is structure and pattern, but with complete spontaneity.

A man says he has been thinking about awareness and our access to it. Where does thought lie in all of this? Rupert uses the analogy of the 3-D screen and glasses. With the glasses on, you are immersed in this world. Think of the human mind as a pair of 3-D goggles. This localises us in the world and everything seems to be real. Consider the possibility that it’s perception, and then thought, that renders the activity of consciousness as the world we know it.

If we're all one, why doesn't the one decide that we be awakened, or unveiled, right now? Rupert responds that in order to appear as an individual, consciousness consents to seem to become finite and pays for doing so with its innate happiness. Suffering is the inevitable consequence of this overlooking and localisation of its true nature. The recognition of being is the only experience that doesn't happen through the finite mind, hence, the common theme in spiritual traditions, 'Know thyself' is the primary imperative, the essence of all great spiritual traditions.

In regards to the awakening of universal consciousness, when does it all end? Rupert says the 'when' implies that it takes place in time, and to forget the 'when'.

A woman, who talks about an experience of being with other people and looking deeply into each other’s eyes, asks, ‘What is this power of eye gazing?’ Rupert suggests that eyes are the most transparent of the senses. When I look into your eyes, I feel like I am looking into that which is seeing, hearing, experiencing. The eyes are a transparent symbol to the heart. Sometimes it is formulised as a practice.

A question is asked about engaging with objects, such as the appreciation for a drink. Can it fit into the understanding as opposed to simply being way to numb our senses? Rupert responds that it can. A bottle of wine can be a sweet celebration of friendship. Don't constrict your expression of joy and celebration for fear of aiding the ego; error on the side of excess.

A man asks if the question, ‘Why is there something rather than nothing?’, is pointless. Rupert suggests that it’s pointless because both the idea of something and the idea of nothing is predicated on the assumption of things. The starting point is wrong. The question is an extension of the initial mistake. Start with being, not things.

A man asks about Maslow's hierarchy of needs. What happens when all those levels collapse, and we are in survival mode and become like animals? Rupert replies that self-transcendence is more like the background of all the other levels, it exists as motivation all the way through experience.

Why the conflict between our animal and true nature? Rupert responds that the primary misunderstanding of the finite mind is that what we are is eternal, and so it translates the memory of eternity into the desire for survival, which is a pale reflection of the memory of our true being.

A woman who engaged in eye gazing said that she is aware of different energies coming through her, darkness or light. Rupert says that it is beautiful to not know what is coming through. It is not awkward that we are looking into their eyes. In fact, what is hard is that you are seeing them looking into your eyes.

A woman asks, in reference to life, 'What is it that moves and leads the show? What is this energy?' Rupert responds that ultimately it cannot be defined or named, nor is it necessary to. We might call it God, infinite being, but these are provisional names according to the moment. Best to leave it unnamed.

A woman says that ever since her mom died forty years ago, she has been looking for her mother. Rupert talks about a children’s book he loves called, ‘Are You My Mother’. It’s a beautiful story of the soul separated from its divine mother. Rupert suggests that is her journey: she has been on a search all these years for her and now she’s been returned home.

A man describes the process he went through after his wife died: a terrible grief that eventually become one love, or our love, from which he took solace. Rupert says there is nothing he could add to the beautiful description.

A woman shares an experience related to the meditation that morning, in which Rupert was talking about coming home and the absolute. She relays how it reminded her of when her father fell. She was in France and flew back in time for her to see him while he was still conscious and he said, ‘Thank you for coming home.'

A woman says she has been living with the idea of fate because she has a genetic predisposition to cancer. She notices that she diminishes life as a protective or pre-emptive mechanism against the fear of death. Rupert responds that it reminds him of his son, who used to not show care that he cared about his exams, so that he didn't feel badly if he failed. He points out that this kind of diminishment defence is a false security. Your purpose is to abide in and as your true nature. Everything in life is an aid to that singular purpose.

A man relays his experience of listening to a Beethoven piece in the morning meditation. He felt it in his body and mind, which felt cleansing. Rupert reiterates that he felt we were all being washed in it. The man asks if Rupert would be willing to share his playlist. Rupert says that he is working on that, as well as reading list.

A man says that he has slowly been trying to share this understanding and teaching with his dad, and his father responds by saying, ‘I’m not ready now’. Rupert suggests that that response implies that he knows what you are referring to, which is a recognition and is beautiful.

A woman asks for an elaboration on the idea that everything happens for a reason. Rupert uses the analogy of a rubber ball that is compressed. That's what we are, contractions of infinite being, a tension that is always tending to return to its natural state. It shows up as the desire for happiness or an artist's desire for beauty. Infinite being is pulling us to return. Rupert says that God is an improv jazz musician, there is structure and pattern, but with complete spontaneity.

A man says he has been thinking about awareness and our access to it. Where does thought lie in all of this? Rupert uses the analogy of the 3-D screen and glasses. With the glasses on, you are immersed in this world. Think of the human mind as a pair of 3-D goggles. This localises us in the world and everything seems to be real. Consider the possibility that it’s perception, and then thought, that renders the activity of consciousness as the world we know it.

If we're all one, why doesn't the one decide that we be awakened, or unveiled, right now? Rupert responds that in order to appear as an individual, consciousness consents to seem to become finite and pays for doing so with its innate happiness. Suffering is the inevitable consequence of this overlooking and localisation of its true nature. The recognition of being is the only experience that doesn't happen through the finite mind, hence, the common theme in spiritual traditions, 'Know thyself' is the primary imperative, the essence of all great spiritual traditions.

In regards to the awakening of universal consciousness, when does it all end? Rupert says the 'when' implies that it takes place in time, and to forget the 'when'.

A woman, who talks about an experience of being with other people and looking deeply into each other’s eyes, asks, ‘What is this power of eye gazing?’ Rupert suggests that eyes are the most transparent of the senses. When I look into your eyes, I feel like I am looking into that which is seeing, hearing, experiencing. The eyes are a transparent symbol to the heart. Sometimes it is formulised as a practice.

A question is asked about engaging with objects, such as the appreciation for a drink. Can it fit into the understanding as opposed to simply being way to numb our senses? Rupert responds that it can. A bottle of wine can be a sweet celebration of friendship. Don't constrict your expression of joy and celebration for fear of aiding the ego; error on the side of excess.

A man asks if the question, ‘Why is there something rather than nothing?’, is pointless. Rupert suggests that it’s pointless because both the idea of something and the idea of nothing is predicated on the assumption of things. The starting point is wrong. The question is an extension of the initial mistake. Start with being, not things.

A man asks about Maslow's hierarchy of needs. What happens when all those levels collapse, and we are in survival mode and become like animals? Rupert replies that self-transcendence is more like the background of all the other levels, it exists as motivation all the way through experience.

Why the conflict between our animal and true nature? Rupert responds that the primary misunderstanding of the finite mind is that what we are is eternal, and so it translates the memory of eternity into the desire for survival, which is a pale reflection of the memory of our true being.

A woman who engaged in eye gazing said that she is aware of different energies coming through her, darkness or light. Rupert says that it is beautiful to not know what is coming through. It is not awkward that we are looking into their eyes. In fact, what is hard is that you are seeing them looking into your eyes.