Nothing Exotic About Being from the media Unhappiness as a Teacher

A man talks about his experience of growing up gay and how it conflicted with his love of Jesus. He says that now his real identity, the one he was always looking for, is his true self.

A man references the enquiry into being not having a gender, but says that he thinks of it as genderful, not genderless. Pure potential. Rupert replies that it is true that being is inherently genderless but contains within it the possibility of all genders.

A man says that he’s been in touch with a feeling of lack and this is the first retreat where he’s had a hard time, but he is now accepting and allowing whatever comes. He asks Rupert if he has ever found that unhappiness was a teacher. Rupert says yes, because it more or less directly points him back to his true nature of happiness. The unhappiness was working on behalf of his true nature.

A woman asks how Rupert reconciled his love of the world and its objects with his early Vedantic studies. Rupert says he can't really say; it just became obvious to him over time that what he loved about the world was its reality. Love is constant, but the world is always changing, so what are we loving? It is the same with people we love: they change, but we love their reality, which is constant.

A woman asks about how we reconcile prehistoric bones, things of the past, with time as a construct. Rupert suggests that the time that seems to be evidenced in prehistoric bones is the mind’s interpretation of that particular sense perception. It is what the human mind projects onto them. There are no bones.

A woman says she understands self-enquiry but not self-abidance. Rupert suggests that we start with the realm of experience that seems to be furthest from us, and move closer. This is experiential self-enquiry. The last layer is existential lack. Then we are just being aware of being. That is self-abidance, even when we add back layers of experience.

A man, who says he is more feeler than thinker, goes blank when we say that’ consciousness localises’. Rupert suggests what he should say is that consciousness seems to localise itself. He uses the analogy of Mary and Jane to clarify. He then uses the metaphor of physical space within a room. It seems the space of the universe is localised in the room, but it is not.

A woman asks about balance. Rupert suggests that it is legitimate to talk about balance when we are at the level of mind, which deals with opposites at the day-to-day level of our lives. But for the one, there are not two things to be balanced. Being is pure perfection, without opposite. The more we recognise the nature of being, the more balanced our relative life becomes.

A man shares his arc of understanding from being on the path. The books he read affirmed his interest in the path and his heart opened. He feels it now infused in everything he encounters. All shines with the self.

A man references the idea that the consciousness-only model will become prevalent and asks whether Rupert has any idea about how and when that will happen. Rupert suggests that it will happen through gathering such as this, then going home and sharing it, but he doesn't know when.

A woman, who found herself lost in thought during meditation, asks, ‘Is that the localisation of consciousness?’ Rupert suggests that what he means by localisation is the body-mind. Right now, infinite consciousness is perceiving this room from the perspective of our body as our mind. The visualisation/thinking in our mind takes place here.

A woman, who attended retreat last year and felt like she was going to dissolve, asks about post-realisation adjustments. Rupert suggests that she touched her true nature and its innate peace was in such contrast to her previous sorrow. The sun of awareness gradually burns off the mist.

A man asks about keeping up with a regular meditation practice. Rupert suggests that it is valuable to spend time each day resting in being, as being.

A man asks about frustration during meditation. Rupert suggests that we are only frustrated if we are trying to control our experience. In this case, if we are frustrated with thinking, stay with the thinking and emphasise the ‘I am’ part of the thought,‘I am thinking’. Also, see that ‘I am thinking’ is one experience, not two.

A man asks about something Rupert said about oneness and the second-person pronoun. Rupert references a conversation between two people and says that when someone provokes feelings, that would be a good time to ask ‘Who am I really?’ as well as ‘Who is this other?’ They are the same.

A woman references the idea that ‘there are no things’ and asks if there are no emotions then. Rupert suggests that if we think of an emotion as a distinct thing, then yes. All there is to an emotion is feeling. It is the experience of feeling. You can't pluck it out of consciousness.

A woman says that when she goes through layers of experience and getting to being she feels peace, but it is a movement, which I am a part of. She says she can't describe it as stillness. Rupert suggests that she ask herself, ‘In my actual experience, does being move?’ When you walk to the dining room, does the experience of being go anywhere? There is walking, but both are true.

A man talks about his experience of growing up gay and how it conflicted with his love of Jesus. He says that now his real identity, the one he was always looking for, is his true self.

A man references the enquiry into being not having a gender, but says that he thinks of it as genderful, not genderless. Pure potential. Rupert replies that it is true that being is inherently genderless but contains within it the possibility of all genders.

A man says that he’s been in touch with a feeling of lack and this is the first retreat where he’s had a hard time, but he is now accepting and allowing whatever comes. He asks Rupert if he has ever found that unhappiness was a teacher. Rupert says yes, because it more or less directly points him back to his true nature of happiness. The unhappiness was working on behalf of his true nature.

A woman asks how Rupert reconciled his love of the world and its objects with his early Vedantic studies. Rupert says he can't really say; it just became obvious to him over time that what he loved about the world was its reality. Love is constant, but the world is always changing, so what are we loving? It is the same with people we love: they change, but we love their reality, which is constant.

A woman asks about how we reconcile prehistoric bones, things of the past, with time as a construct. Rupert suggests that the time that seems to be evidenced in prehistoric bones is the mind’s interpretation of that particular sense perception. It is what the human mind projects onto them. There are no bones.

A woman says she understands self-enquiry but not self-abidance. Rupert suggests that we start with the realm of experience that seems to be furthest from us, and move closer. This is experiential self-enquiry. The last layer is existential lack. Then we are just being aware of being. That is self-abidance, even when we add back layers of experience.

A man, who says he is more feeler than thinker, goes blank when we say that’ consciousness localises’. Rupert suggests what he should say is that consciousness seems to localise itself. He uses the analogy of Mary and Jane to clarify. He then uses the metaphor of physical space within a room. It seems the space of the universe is localised in the room, but it is not.

A woman asks about balance. Rupert suggests that it is legitimate to talk about balance when we are at the level of mind, which deals with opposites at the day-to-day level of our lives. But for the one, there are not two things to be balanced. Being is pure perfection, without opposite. The more we recognise the nature of being, the more balanced our relative life becomes.

A man shares his arc of understanding from being on the path. The books he read affirmed his interest in the path and his heart opened. He feels it now infused in everything he encounters. All shines with the self.

A man references the idea that the consciousness-only model will become prevalent and asks whether Rupert has any idea about how and when that will happen. Rupert suggests that it will happen through gathering such as this, then going home and sharing it, but he doesn't know when.

A woman, who found herself lost in thought during meditation, asks, ‘Is that the localisation of consciousness?’ Rupert suggests that what he means by localisation is the body-mind. Right now, infinite consciousness is perceiving this room from the perspective of our body as our mind. The visualisation/thinking in our mind takes place here.

A woman, who attended retreat last year and felt like she was going to dissolve, asks about post-realisation adjustments. Rupert suggests that she touched her true nature and its innate peace was in such contrast to her previous sorrow. The sun of awareness gradually burns off the mist.

A man asks about keeping up with a regular meditation practice. Rupert suggests that it is valuable to spend time each day resting in being, as being.

A man asks about frustration during meditation. Rupert suggests that we are only frustrated if we are trying to control our experience. In this case, if we are frustrated with thinking, stay with the thinking and emphasise the ‘I am’ part of the thought,‘I am thinking’. Also, see that ‘I am thinking’ is one experience, not two.

A man asks about something Rupert said about oneness and the second-person pronoun. Rupert references a conversation between two people and says that when someone provokes feelings, that would be a good time to ask ‘Who am I really?’ as well as ‘Who is this other?’ They are the same.

A woman references the idea that ‘there are no things’ and asks if there are no emotions then. Rupert suggests that if we think of an emotion as a distinct thing, then yes. All there is to an emotion is feeling. It is the experience of feeling. You can't pluck it out of consciousness.

A woman says that when she goes through layers of experience and getting to being she feels peace, but it is a movement, which I am a part of. She says she can't describe it as stillness. Rupert suggests that she ask herself, ‘In my actual experience, does being move?’ When you walk to the dining room, does the experience of being go anywhere? There is walking, but both are true.