Seeing Is Limited, Our Eyes Are Not Clear Windows from the media Simply Be
A woman says she's having trouble separating perception from feeling, which she uses with her artistic endeavours. Rupert replies that we perceive sensations on the inside and on the outside of the body. He suggests the faculty of seeing is limited by the finite mind; our eyes are not like clear windows. We see a combination of what reality is and what our mind imposes; we half create, half perceive. Ask, 'What am I seeing?' What is appearing through perception – taste of nature's eternity or the ten thousand things. Which are we doing?
- Duration: 6 minutes and 37 seconds
- Recorded on: Nov 20, 2022
- Event: One Day at Colet House - 20th November
Instead of being aware of experience, become aware of being. Normally, awareness of experience obscures awareness of being. In meditation, awareness of being outshines awareness of experience. Being is to experience as the screen is to the movie. When we say ‘I am upset’, ‘I am’ is the screen, referring to being; the feeling of upset is in the movie. The screen never changes throughout the movie; being never changes throughout the experience of our lives. It is always the same – transparent, empty, silent, still. Appearances all happen in the movie; not to the screen. Being eternally is. I eternally am. It isn’t necessary to interfere with a movie to see the screen, or interfere with experience to stand knowingly as being. When ‘I am’ becomes disentangled from experience, it stands revealed as infinite being, God's being. All practices from all religious and spiritual traditions can be distilled into a single suggestion – ‘simply be.’
A woman asks about how to overcome the impatience of the mind. Rupert suggests that we just understand that impatience is part of the story, part of our conditioning. We don’t need to get involved with the story of impatience. Everything that has come before is part of the conditioning that generates the thought, ‘I am impatient to get to…’. This doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t take an interest in our life, but we don’t need to change the story at all.
A woman says she has been infatuated with someone outside her relationship and asks how to move forward and love someone while choosing not to be with them. Rupert suggests that separating from a long-term relationship takes time and can be painful but the love is deeper than that. It comes from the shared being, which remains. The love will be there and continue in a new form, so keep it alive in your heart. In addition, keep this pattern from happening again by taking a pause and stepping back from previous behaviour. Commit to be honest and open with any future partner.
A woman who says she understands the separate self is a fiction asks about where the locus of deciding is.‘Is there a me deciding?’ Rupert suggests that decisions are made but there is no separate person making them. What decides that it is going to rain? There is freedom, but there is no independent entity choosing it. On whose behalf do our choices arrive? A separate self or the true self?
A man, who is expecting a moment of recognition, asks about the seeking energy which doesn't seem to stop. Rupert says not to expect a moment of recognition that brings seeking to an end immediately. Ramana Maharshi compared it to turning off a fan, which can continue to go around after it is turned off. Think of it like a boat whose engines are turned off but comes to a stop slowly. Don't worry about the turning off; it will take care of itself; it will wind down of its own accord.
A man asks about suffering and how God doesn't know it directly. Rupert says that God is like Beethoven at the end of his life – he writes the music but doesn't hear it. By itself, God cannot know its creation; it can only do so from the perspective of a finite mind. Holding up a glass, Rupert asks from what point of view would God view this glass. Viewing it from every point, being non-localised, God could not see it.
A woman asks about the relationship between the sense of separation and trauma in early childhood, which seem like fragments that need to be integrated. Rupert responds it's not necessary to explore or resolve the trauma to recognise our true nature. But it is necessary to resolve trauma if we want to live successfully in the world, such as in intimate relationships.
A woman asks about manifestation and intention. Rupert suggests that this new-age idea has a kernel of truth, which is that reality is abundant and full. What is not true is that the ego appropriates it to fulfil its needs. The question is how do we upgrade the idea of manifestation? If we understand and feel that our being is God's being, then the universe will tailor its abundance to our personal circumstance, without our having to do anything about it.
A woman asks for help with stopping conflict as she feels she spends a lot of time in anger. Rupert asks if this is conflict in a relationship, and if so – if she is unable to leave – do everything she can to diminish the conflict, such as getting professional help for herself, if she cannot get her partner into therapy. It's too much to take care of on her own.
A woman asks about if there is a way to share this understanding with others who aren’t interested in it. Rupert suggests that, as she said, ‘her being is blossoming’, which is all you need to share it. In the case of those who are suffering, you may need to articulate it in a verbal way by tailoring it to your friend’s understanding. You go to where they are.
A man asks about preparing for the residues of the ‘whirlpool’ after death. Rupert suggests that the residues of the whirlpool are the deeper layers of the mind, that which gave the mind its structure. Those ripples may remain and coalesce downstream. In death, as in life, we devote our mind and heart to truth. The best preparation is to die before we die.
A woman says she's having trouble separating perception from feeling, which she uses with her artistic endeavours. Rupert replies that we perceive sensations on the inside and on the outside of the body. He suggests the faculty of seeing is limited by the finite mind; our eyes are not like clear windows. We see a combination of what reality is and what our mind imposes; we half create, half perceive. Ask, 'What am I seeing?' What is appearing through perception – taste of nature's eternity or the ten thousand things. Which are we doing?
A woman, who practises japa with friends, asks what the point is if we are simply being. Rupert suggests that we may practise japa because we are so regularly drawn out to the content of experience. It is in response to this that teaching doesn’t require a big step all the way back to being. Japa is an intermediary step, a stepping stone, to gather and steady the mind.
Instead of being aware of experience, become aware of being. Normally, awareness of experience obscures awareness of being. In meditation, awareness of being outshines awareness of experience. Being is to experience as the screen is to the movie. When we say ‘I am upset’, ‘I am’ is the screen, referring to being; the feeling of upset is in the movie. The screen never changes throughout the movie; being never changes throughout the experience of our lives. It is always the same – transparent, empty, silent, still. Appearances all happen in the movie; not to the screen. Being eternally is. I eternally am. It isn’t necessary to interfere with a movie to see the screen, or interfere with experience to stand knowingly as being. When ‘I am’ becomes disentangled from experience, it stands revealed as infinite being, God's being. All practices from all religious and spiritual traditions can be distilled into a single suggestion – ‘simply be.’
A woman asks about how to overcome the impatience of the mind. Rupert suggests that we just understand that impatience is part of the story, part of our conditioning. We don’t need to get involved with the story of impatience. Everything that has come before is part of the conditioning that generates the thought, ‘I am impatient to get to…’. This doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t take an interest in our life, but we don’t need to change the story at all.
A woman says she has been infatuated with someone outside her relationship and asks how to move forward and love someone while choosing not to be with them. Rupert suggests that separating from a long-term relationship takes time and can be painful but the love is deeper than that. It comes from the shared being, which remains. The love will be there and continue in a new form, so keep it alive in your heart. In addition, keep this pattern from happening again by taking a pause and stepping back from previous behaviour. Commit to be honest and open with any future partner.
A woman who says she understands the separate self is a fiction asks about where the locus of deciding is.‘Is there a me deciding?’ Rupert suggests that decisions are made but there is no separate person making them. What decides that it is going to rain? There is freedom, but there is no independent entity choosing it. On whose behalf do our choices arrive? A separate self or the true self?
A man, who is expecting a moment of recognition, asks about the seeking energy which doesn't seem to stop. Rupert says not to expect a moment of recognition that brings seeking to an end immediately. Ramana Maharshi compared it to turning off a fan, which can continue to go around after it is turned off. Think of it like a boat whose engines are turned off but comes to a stop slowly. Don't worry about the turning off; it will take care of itself; it will wind down of its own accord.
A man asks about suffering and how God doesn't know it directly. Rupert says that God is like Beethoven at the end of his life – he writes the music but doesn't hear it. By itself, God cannot know its creation; it can only do so from the perspective of a finite mind. Holding up a glass, Rupert asks from what point of view would God view this glass. Viewing it from every point, being non-localised, God could not see it.
A woman asks about the relationship between the sense of separation and trauma in early childhood, which seem like fragments that need to be integrated. Rupert responds it's not necessary to explore or resolve the trauma to recognise our true nature. But it is necessary to resolve trauma if we want to live successfully in the world, such as in intimate relationships.
A woman asks about manifestation and intention. Rupert suggests that this new-age idea has a kernel of truth, which is that reality is abundant and full. What is not true is that the ego appropriates it to fulfil its needs. The question is how do we upgrade the idea of manifestation? If we understand and feel that our being is God's being, then the universe will tailor its abundance to our personal circumstance, without our having to do anything about it.
A woman asks for help with stopping conflict as she feels she spends a lot of time in anger. Rupert asks if this is conflict in a relationship, and if so – if she is unable to leave – do everything she can to diminish the conflict, such as getting professional help for herself, if she cannot get her partner into therapy. It's too much to take care of on her own.
A woman asks about if there is a way to share this understanding with others who aren’t interested in it. Rupert suggests that, as she said, ‘her being is blossoming’, which is all you need to share it. In the case of those who are suffering, you may need to articulate it in a verbal way by tailoring it to your friend’s understanding. You go to where they are.
A man asks about preparing for the residues of the ‘whirlpool’ after death. Rupert suggests that the residues of the whirlpool are the deeper layers of the mind, that which gave the mind its structure. Those ripples may remain and coalesce downstream. In death, as in life, we devote our mind and heart to truth. The best preparation is to die before we die.
A woman says she's having trouble separating perception from feeling, which she uses with her artistic endeavours. Rupert replies that we perceive sensations on the inside and on the outside of the body. He suggests the faculty of seeing is limited by the finite mind; our eyes are not like clear windows. We see a combination of what reality is and what our mind imposes; we half create, half perceive. Ask, 'What am I seeing?' What is appearing through perception – taste of nature's eternity or the ten thousand things. Which are we doing?
A woman, who practises japa with friends, asks what the point is if we are simply being. Rupert suggests that we may practise japa because we are so regularly drawn out to the content of experience. It is in response to this that teaching doesn’t require a big step all the way back to being. Japa is an intermediary step, a stepping stone, to gather and steady the mind.