Nobody Experiences ‘I Am Not’

A woman asks if we need to be physiologically awake in order to be knowingly the presence of awareness? Rupert replies that it is not necessary to be physiologically awake, because it’s not the body or the mind that knows awareness – it is awareness that knows awareness. And awareness cannot not know itself, in the same way that the sun cannot not illuminate itself. The sun is always illuminating itself. And awareness is eternally aware of itself, even though it is often mixed up with thoughts and perceptions.

A woman asks Rupert to recount the pathways or steps he had detailed earlier that day in a guided meditation. Modifying the content a bit from the meditation, Rupert describes them as: 1) separation; 2) discrimination/witnessing; 3) openness/space of awareness; 4) love/unity; and 5) expression/celebration. He suggests everyone spend as much time as possible on numbers 2 through 5, while spending less time on the first path of separation.

A woman asks how she help a friend who is ill and wants to undergo assisted suicide? Rupert encourages her that whatever her friend chooses, the greatest gift she can give her is access to the peace of her own being. ‘Find your own way, tailored to the moment, from what you, yourself, have seen . . . no one can argue with peace itself, so be that yourself and then try to use your words to let her know how you found this peace in yourself.’

A woman says she’s been feeling ‘the pull of grace’ Rupert has spoken of, and that her perception of this awareness is an abstract stillness. So, she wonders how awareness can get into motion, and how to interact in the world from the non-dual understanding. Rupert clarifies that awareness has no motivation; it’s the mind that has it, the mind that is an activity of awareness. The mind has impulses, or a storehouse of energies, that produce our thoughts and propel our actions. Deep innate tendencies. And each person’s storehouse is different. To interact with the world, you act with the thought: How can I use my faculties, interests and actions in service of love and understanding? He suggests that for a clue to how to do this: ‘Check in with what you love to do.’

A woman asks if Rupert could speak of death and beyond? He replies that he’s not sure. ‘I can speak of the disappearance of thoughts, feelings, sensations and perceptions . . . but I’ve never had the experience of the disappearance or absence of my being. I’ve never had the experience “I am not.”’ This leads to a discussion exploring concepts of death, culminating in the idea that what we are – being, consciousness – doesn’t die; it’s simply that what consciousness takes in the temporary form of our body-mind dissolves.

A woman states that at end of the day’s second contemplation, she was overwhelmed by resistance. She remembered Rupert’s previous encouragement to ‘tell’ resistance, ‘come take me’, and somehow it ended immediately. Rupert tells her, ‘That’s beautiful; you surrendered . . . It’s interesting that you said you had no other option but to surrender, because if you had an option, you would likely have taken it. If the experience is so intense that the mind can’t handle it, then surrender is natural. The mind realises that none of my strategies will work. Then, an immense peace is felt.’

A woman, who is puzzled by a near-death encounter she’d had – a sense of departing, seeing an immense light – asks Rupert about whether she’d possibly had an experience of ‘I am not’. Rupert has her consider that when she saw the light, she was present to it, otherwise she couldn’t report on it. ‘Despite what may have happened with your body, you, awareness, were there. He says ironically, ‘Have you ever had the experience of not being? The question doesn’t make sense.’

A woman asks how, when we are in such a peaceful place through understanding the teachings, should we react to people who are upset at us for seeming peaceful while they are suffering. Rupert replies that when people are angry with us and say unkind things, we should thank them in our heart like it’s a gift from God to test our stability, the peace of our true nature, to use it as an opportunity to seek out any residual pockets of the separate self in us.

A woman, new to non-dual understanding, asks how to go from ‘I can’t find any limit to awareness’ to ‘awareness is unlimited’? She says, she doesn’t trust her mind when it says, ‘I cannot find any limit.’ Rupert tells her, ‘It’s a very profound question. You are quite right not to trust your mind, but you shouldn’t be asking your mind about the nature of awareness. The very best the mind can say is, “I don’t know whether awareness is limited or not.”’ He guides her through an enquiry to go to the experience of awareness itself, to which the mind and all other objective experience appears. In doing so, we can experience our limitlessness, we can taste our infinity.

A man wonders senses that his life is a pivot point in his ancestral storyline of shame, and he’s also concerned that his son may inherit the same shame of suffering. Rupert encourages him to consider that his ancestors have offered him their pain because while they couldn’t handle it, he can; that he and his son have been given this gift of ancestral shame as well as the means to dissolve this inherited suffering for themselves and their ancestors.

A man, who’d previously thought he’d had a scientific mind but now is more interested in the experiential aspect of non-dual understanding, asks Rupert if it is essential to keep exploring beyond the experiential. Rupert replies that it is ‘essential only for those for whom it is essential’. In other words, there is a vast variety of minds, and some are philosophical and scientific. Others not so much. All that is required is that we recognise our being and that we share it with everyone and everything. But it is certainly legitimate if a mind has questions, objections, wants to build a model of reality, and so on. Some teachings just beat the mind down every time it asks a question. But in our approach, we respect the mind that questions, and we go with it for as long as it questions, until in the end the mind brings itself to its own end through understanding.

A woman asks if we need to be physiologically awake in order to be knowingly the presence of awareness? Rupert replies that it is not necessary to be physiologically awake, because it’s not the body or the mind that knows awareness – it is awareness that knows awareness. And awareness cannot not know itself, in the same way that the sun cannot not illuminate itself. The sun is always illuminating itself. And awareness is eternally aware of itself, even though it is often mixed up with thoughts and perceptions.

A woman asks Rupert to recount the pathways or steps he had detailed earlier that day in a guided meditation. Modifying the content a bit from the meditation, Rupert describes them as: 1) separation; 2) discrimination/witnessing; 3) openness/space of awareness; 4) love/unity; and 5) expression/celebration. He suggests everyone spend as much time as possible on numbers 2 through 5, while spending less time on the first path of separation.

A woman asks how she help a friend who is ill and wants to undergo assisted suicide? Rupert encourages her that whatever her friend chooses, the greatest gift she can give her is access to the peace of her own being. ‘Find your own way, tailored to the moment, from what you, yourself, have seen . . . no one can argue with peace itself, so be that yourself and then try to use your words to let her know how you found this peace in yourself.’

A woman says she’s been feeling ‘the pull of grace’ Rupert has spoken of, and that her perception of this awareness is an abstract stillness. So, she wonders how awareness can get into motion, and how to interact in the world from the non-dual understanding. Rupert clarifies that awareness has no motivation; it’s the mind that has it, the mind that is an activity of awareness. The mind has impulses, or a storehouse of energies, that produce our thoughts and propel our actions. Deep innate tendencies. And each person’s storehouse is different. To interact with the world, you act with the thought: How can I use my faculties, interests and actions in service of love and understanding? He suggests that for a clue to how to do this: ‘Check in with what you love to do.’

A woman asks if Rupert could speak of death and beyond? He replies that he’s not sure. ‘I can speak of the disappearance of thoughts, feelings, sensations and perceptions . . . but I’ve never had the experience of the disappearance or absence of my being. I’ve never had the experience “I am not.”’ This leads to a discussion exploring concepts of death, culminating in the idea that what we are – being, consciousness – doesn’t die; it’s simply that what consciousness takes in the temporary form of our body-mind dissolves.

A woman states that at end of the day’s second contemplation, she was overwhelmed by resistance. She remembered Rupert’s previous encouragement to ‘tell’ resistance, ‘come take me’, and somehow it ended immediately. Rupert tells her, ‘That’s beautiful; you surrendered . . . It’s interesting that you said you had no other option but to surrender, because if you had an option, you would likely have taken it. If the experience is so intense that the mind can’t handle it, then surrender is natural. The mind realises that none of my strategies will work. Then, an immense peace is felt.’

A woman, who is puzzled by a near-death encounter she’d had – a sense of departing, seeing an immense light – asks Rupert about whether she’d possibly had an experience of ‘I am not’. Rupert has her consider that when she saw the light, she was present to it, otherwise she couldn’t report on it. ‘Despite what may have happened with your body, you, awareness, were there. He says ironically, ‘Have you ever had the experience of not being? The question doesn’t make sense.’

A woman asks how, when we are in such a peaceful place through understanding the teachings, should we react to people who are upset at us for seeming peaceful while they are suffering. Rupert replies that when people are angry with us and say unkind things, we should thank them in our heart like it’s a gift from God to test our stability, the peace of our true nature, to use it as an opportunity to seek out any residual pockets of the separate self in us.

A woman, new to non-dual understanding, asks how to go from ‘I can’t find any limit to awareness’ to ‘awareness is unlimited’? She says, she doesn’t trust her mind when it says, ‘I cannot find any limit.’ Rupert tells her, ‘It’s a very profound question. You are quite right not to trust your mind, but you shouldn’t be asking your mind about the nature of awareness. The very best the mind can say is, “I don’t know whether awareness is limited or not.”’ He guides her through an enquiry to go to the experience of awareness itself, to which the mind and all other objective experience appears. In doing so, we can experience our limitlessness, we can taste our infinity.

A man wonders senses that his life is a pivot point in his ancestral storyline of shame, and he’s also concerned that his son may inherit the same shame of suffering. Rupert encourages him to consider that his ancestors have offered him their pain because while they couldn’t handle it, he can; that he and his son have been given this gift of ancestral shame as well as the means to dissolve this inherited suffering for themselves and their ancestors.

A man, who’d previously thought he’d had a scientific mind but now is more interested in the experiential aspect of non-dual understanding, asks Rupert if it is essential to keep exploring beyond the experiential. Rupert replies that it is ‘essential only for those for whom it is essential’. In other words, there is a vast variety of minds, and some are philosophical and scientific. Others not so much. All that is required is that we recognise our being and that we share it with everyone and everything. But it is certainly legitimate if a mind has questions, objections, wants to build a model of reality, and so on. Some teachings just beat the mind down every time it asks a question. But in our approach, we respect the mind that questions, and we go with it for as long as it questions, until in the end the mind brings itself to its own end through understanding.