Your Teaching Evolves with Understanding from the media Explore Experience Rather Than Belief
A woman relates that she is deeply touched by what Rupert is sharing. She says that the teaching and sharing from the yoga and Buddhist traditions, which she has been over many years, don’t make much sense anymore – there’s too much extra, unnecessary stuff, and she asks how Rupert might explain the non-dual understanding to a group of people completely new to it? Would offering something like focussing on breath, etc., still even be relevant? Rupert replies that if he was to share through a public talk with a new group, he would not go deeply into the understanding. However, he wouldn’t spend more five minutes on the breath, or whatever. Maybe, he suggests, start with being aware of the entirety of your experience, including the breath, then ask: What is it that’s aware of all these things? What IS this ‘I’ that’s aware? Since she knows the specific groups she’s addressing, he advises her to just be as simple and clear as possible with them. He encourages her to allow her teaching to evolve with her understanding. ‘Because then your teaching is going to be alive.’
- Duration: 14 minutes and 33 seconds
- Recorded on: Apr 24, 2024
- Event: Seven-Day Meditation Retreat at Mandali – 20 to 27 April 2024
A man asks about consciousness and artificial intelligence, specifically whether, from a non-dual perspective, it could actually happen that AI becomes conscious and self-aware in the way that humans are? Rupert asserts that the answer is no. The whole idea that a computer could become conscious is predicated on an assumption, namely that consciousness is an emergent property of the body, the brain. If that were the case, then yes, it would only be a matter of time before we were able to create another kind of body from which consciousness could emerge. But it’s not the case, consciousness is primary. Bodies emerge from consciousness, not the other way around. It’s just a basic mistake. This evolves into a deeper discussion about sentience involving the Mary and Jane analogy.
A man asks Rupert to elaborate on the steps or paths he spoke about during a meditation the previous day. He says he was triggered afterwards at dinner and couldn’t get to the path of love. Rupert recounts the steps and reaffirms how they are applicable to all of life. The first thing to know about anybody you might be having conflict is that ‘they are my being!’ With that felt understanding, then continue the conversation. It will have a profound impact and give the best chance for the conflict to resolve in harmony.
A woman relates that she is deeply touched by what Rupert is sharing. She says that the teaching and sharing from the yoga and Buddhist traditions, which she has been over many years, don’t make much sense anymore – there’s too much extra, unnecessary stuff, and she asks how Rupert might explain the non-dual understanding to a group of people completely new to it? Would offering something like focussing on breath, etc., still even be relevant? Rupert replies that if he was to share through a public talk with a new group, he would not go deeply into the understanding. However, he wouldn’t spend more five minutes on the breath, or whatever. Maybe, he suggests, start with being aware of the entirety of your experience, including the breath, then ask: What is it that’s aware of all these things? What IS this ‘I’ that’s aware? Since she knows the specific groups she’s addressing, he advises her to just be as simple and clear as possible with them. He encourages her to allow her teaching to evolve with her understanding. ‘Because then your teaching is going to be alive.’
A man reports that when Rupert said, ‘awareness knows just “to be”’, he realised that it’s the same thing for him. Rupert responds, ‘Yes, that’s exactly it. There’s only one awareness. God’s being is shining in each of us, as us, the awareness that ‘I am”’. He encourages the man to just express this love and understanding to everyone and everything in his life.
A woman shares her feedback for Rupert in light of a quotation he frequently cites, ‘If I speak, I am a liar, but if I remain silent, I am a coward.’ She is deeply grateful and says not to worry if he doesn’t find the words.
A woman states that although she tries to follow the paths Rupert described the previous day, she keeps ending up back with a broken heart rather than on the path of celebration. She says there is so much hurt, while maybe not in her thoughts, but at least in the body. Rupert consoles her, saying that yes, the body stores hurt even if the events leave the mind. But deeper than all that is our being, which is always there in exactly the same, pristine condition, shining within as the experience ‘I am’. To paraphrase Meister Eckhart: ‘There is a place in the mind (soul) that has never been hurt by experience.’
A man says Rupert’s meditations have been very helpful, especially in clarifying that awareness is not only the space for experience but also the substance of the objects of experience. He asks, why does awareness play the game of hide and seek with itself? Rupert replies that the most satisfactory answer is that awareness does not do this for a reason. ‘I suggest that it does it simply because it is its nature to do so.’ He goes on to say that awareness is totally, unconditionally in love with everything, including the manifestation of the separate self.
A man asks how he can overcome his belief that ‘I am’ is located in the body. Rupert leads him through a self-enquiry process entailing such questions as: Would you agree, first of all, that ‘I am’ refers to the experience of being? Would you agree that you are having the experience of being? When asked what is the nature of this experience of being, the man replies, ‘I am just aware.’ Rupert encourages him to keep exploring what he experiences rather than what he believes.
A woman says that from something she heard the previous day, she had never been closer in realising her true self. She was touched very deeply and wonders what this means regarding what should be her true path? Rupert tells her he doesn’t want to rationally interpret what happened, as it would not match your experience. He just acknowledges that her heart was so deeply touched that something melted, and her being shone through. They agree that this is a hint that her path, however it expresses itself, is primarily the way of the heart.
A woman says that a few times recently she felt she understood that there is one divine consciousness, and she is that. Also, she understands that there is no duality, only oneness and interconnectivity. So, does it matter where awareness focusses, or should we focus on that oneness as we carry out our activities? Rupert replies that everyday events require us to show up as appropriate, to give our attention to the content of experience. We only need to turn the movie off when we are lost and can’t see the screen. Otherwise, we enjoy the movie playing but also see the screen. The discussion continues in this vein towards the dissolving of the conflict between experience and being.
A woman, who is enjoying her first retreat, was struck during a meditation this day over Rupert’s use of the term ‘portal’, which suggests her being in a place of separation. Rupert responds that her disappointment over the term is legitimate, and that he was just using it as a concession to explain the ‘distinction’ between the finite mind and infinite awareness. The finite cannot actually be placed in relation to the infinite.
A man asks if God knows anything. Rupert replies no, because for God to know anything, it would have to stand apart from it. It knows nothing but is everything. The man follows up by asking about this function of knowing in human experience. Rupert suggests that a human mind, which consists of thinking and perceiving, refracts knowing into an inside ‘me’ and an outside ‘world’. Pure knowing is your primary experience. Then you go through life deeply exploring the content of experience, and you find out all there is to experience is the knowing. Knowing is the alpha and omega.
A woman, who is on her second retreat, relates that she has less resistance than she did the first time. Now, she is able to surrender, or at least surrender to not surrendering, but it is feeling very uncomfortable. Rupert assures her things are moving in a good direction, and says: ‘It may not be comfortable, but your resistance has sunk down from your mind. You’re coming in contact not just with your rational objections but with your existential resistance. And it’s really the resistance that the separate self feels when it realises that its days are numbered.’
A man says he’s not able to feel my being as infinite, that his sense of being is limited to his body. Rupert recommends that he follows the retreat meditations and rests in being despite all his mind’s objections. Those objections will likely resist with a vengeance to prevent the sense of separation from dying. He guides the man through a self-enquiry process to help him experience being as infinite. He tells the man: ‘This experience of resting in being, awareness of being – it may not seem much from the point of view of the object-knowing mind, but it is the profoundest experience it is possible to have.’ And: ‘If you want to know the nature of being, go deeply into the experience of being, and you will discover it.’
A man asks about consciousness and artificial intelligence, specifically whether, from a non-dual perspective, it could actually happen that AI becomes conscious and self-aware in the way that humans are? Rupert asserts that the answer is no. The whole idea that a computer could become conscious is predicated on an assumption, namely that consciousness is an emergent property of the body, the brain. If that were the case, then yes, it would only be a matter of time before we were able to create another kind of body from which consciousness could emerge. But it’s not the case, consciousness is primary. Bodies emerge from consciousness, not the other way around. It’s just a basic mistake. This evolves into a deeper discussion about sentience involving the Mary and Jane analogy.
A man asks Rupert to elaborate on the steps or paths he spoke about during a meditation the previous day. He says he was triggered afterwards at dinner and couldn’t get to the path of love. Rupert recounts the steps and reaffirms how they are applicable to all of life. The first thing to know about anybody you might be having conflict is that ‘they are my being!’ With that felt understanding, then continue the conversation. It will have a profound impact and give the best chance for the conflict to resolve in harmony.
A woman relates that she is deeply touched by what Rupert is sharing. She says that the teaching and sharing from the yoga and Buddhist traditions, which she has been over many years, don’t make much sense anymore – there’s too much extra, unnecessary stuff, and she asks how Rupert might explain the non-dual understanding to a group of people completely new to it? Would offering something like focussing on breath, etc., still even be relevant? Rupert replies that if he was to share through a public talk with a new group, he would not go deeply into the understanding. However, he wouldn’t spend more five minutes on the breath, or whatever. Maybe, he suggests, start with being aware of the entirety of your experience, including the breath, then ask: What is it that’s aware of all these things? What IS this ‘I’ that’s aware? Since she knows the specific groups she’s addressing, he advises her to just be as simple and clear as possible with them. He encourages her to allow her teaching to evolve with her understanding. ‘Because then your teaching is going to be alive.’
A man reports that when Rupert said, ‘awareness knows just “to be”’, he realised that it’s the same thing for him. Rupert responds, ‘Yes, that’s exactly it. There’s only one awareness. God’s being is shining in each of us, as us, the awareness that ‘I am”’. He encourages the man to just express this love and understanding to everyone and everything in his life.
A woman shares her feedback for Rupert in light of a quotation he frequently cites, ‘If I speak, I am a liar, but if I remain silent, I am a coward.’ She is deeply grateful and says not to worry if he doesn’t find the words.
A woman states that although she tries to follow the paths Rupert described the previous day, she keeps ending up back with a broken heart rather than on the path of celebration. She says there is so much hurt, while maybe not in her thoughts, but at least in the body. Rupert consoles her, saying that yes, the body stores hurt even if the events leave the mind. But deeper than all that is our being, which is always there in exactly the same, pristine condition, shining within as the experience ‘I am’. To paraphrase Meister Eckhart: ‘There is a place in the mind (soul) that has never been hurt by experience.’
A man says Rupert’s meditations have been very helpful, especially in clarifying that awareness is not only the space for experience but also the substance of the objects of experience. He asks, why does awareness play the game of hide and seek with itself? Rupert replies that the most satisfactory answer is that awareness does not do this for a reason. ‘I suggest that it does it simply because it is its nature to do so.’ He goes on to say that awareness is totally, unconditionally in love with everything, including the manifestation of the separate self.
A man asks how he can overcome his belief that ‘I am’ is located in the body. Rupert leads him through a self-enquiry process entailing such questions as: Would you agree, first of all, that ‘I am’ refers to the experience of being? Would you agree that you are having the experience of being? When asked what is the nature of this experience of being, the man replies, ‘I am just aware.’ Rupert encourages him to keep exploring what he experiences rather than what he believes.
A woman says that from something she heard the previous day, she had never been closer in realising her true self. She was touched very deeply and wonders what this means regarding what should be her true path? Rupert tells her he doesn’t want to rationally interpret what happened, as it would not match your experience. He just acknowledges that her heart was so deeply touched that something melted, and her being shone through. They agree that this is a hint that her path, however it expresses itself, is primarily the way of the heart.
A woman says that a few times recently she felt she understood that there is one divine consciousness, and she is that. Also, she understands that there is no duality, only oneness and interconnectivity. So, does it matter where awareness focusses, or should we focus on that oneness as we carry out our activities? Rupert replies that everyday events require us to show up as appropriate, to give our attention to the content of experience. We only need to turn the movie off when we are lost and can’t see the screen. Otherwise, we enjoy the movie playing but also see the screen. The discussion continues in this vein towards the dissolving of the conflict between experience and being.
A woman, who is enjoying her first retreat, was struck during a meditation this day over Rupert’s use of the term ‘portal’, which suggests her being in a place of separation. Rupert responds that her disappointment over the term is legitimate, and that he was just using it as a concession to explain the ‘distinction’ between the finite mind and infinite awareness. The finite cannot actually be placed in relation to the infinite.
A man asks if God knows anything. Rupert replies no, because for God to know anything, it would have to stand apart from it. It knows nothing but is everything. The man follows up by asking about this function of knowing in human experience. Rupert suggests that a human mind, which consists of thinking and perceiving, refracts knowing into an inside ‘me’ and an outside ‘world’. Pure knowing is your primary experience. Then you go through life deeply exploring the content of experience, and you find out all there is to experience is the knowing. Knowing is the alpha and omega.
A woman, who is on her second retreat, relates that she has less resistance than she did the first time. Now, she is able to surrender, or at least surrender to not surrendering, but it is feeling very uncomfortable. Rupert assures her things are moving in a good direction, and says: ‘It may not be comfortable, but your resistance has sunk down from your mind. You’re coming in contact not just with your rational objections but with your existential resistance. And it’s really the resistance that the separate self feels when it realises that its days are numbered.’
A man says he’s not able to feel my being as infinite, that his sense of being is limited to his body. Rupert recommends that he follows the retreat meditations and rests in being despite all his mind’s objections. Those objections will likely resist with a vengeance to prevent the sense of separation from dying. He guides the man through a self-enquiry process to help him experience being as infinite. He tells the man: ‘This experience of resting in being, awareness of being – it may not seem much from the point of view of the object-knowing mind, but it is the profoundest experience it is possible to have.’ And: ‘If you want to know the nature of being, go deeply into the experience of being, and you will discover it.’