Reality Is One Without Limits

All religious and spiritual traditions suggest that reality is one. It is not something extraordinary, but simply that which is. It is said to be ‘not two’, or non-dual, because the sages considered it safer to say what reality is not, rather than defining what it is. All names describe parts, so no name can describe the whole. Why does reality appear as ten thousand things? Because we perceive it from a limited, localised point of view. It’s not possible for that which is limited to perceive that which is unlimited. If reality is one, there can be no limits, nor separation or independent selves. Reality never lies behind the world; it shines as the world. Reality can never be endarkened by experience, so there is no question of enlightenment. Appearances don’t change; it is our beliefs that subside as the inevitable consequence of this understanding. Uncaused peace emerges and suffuses all experience.

A man asks, ‘Are ‘I’ and knowingness the same?’ Rupert says that knowing, or consciousness, is all that is, has ever, or could ever, be known. We know that consciousness is real. We can’t be sure that what we are conscious of is real in the way that we perceive it, but our awareness of whatever it is is real. Even if the world is an illusion, it could not appear to something that is not real. That which knows cannot be an illusion. And who knows that there is consciousness? Consciousness, awareness aware of itself. When we say, ‘I know that I am aware’, the’ ‘I that knows and the experience of being aware is the same I. There is only knowing, knowing only knowing.

A woman asks about the role of beliefs in everyday decisions, such as flying during COVID, and whether beliefs are impersonal. Rupert responds that awareness doesn't share the limitations of belief. Therefore, awareness, not beliefs, are impersonal and is the source of causeless peace.

Rupert suggests how to deal with boredom for a man who feels anxious and bored. We feel bored when we feel incomplete and our boredom propels us toward something – it could be an object, substance or thinking – to bring a degree of relief, but then the thought process ends, and the emptiness and boredom rises again. Sooner or later, we have to face or our boredom or we will always be addicted to substances or activities. When we do, we will find no lack and discover what we previously sought in activities and substances.

What is meant by relationships in non-dual teachings? Rupert responds that the common understanding of relationship is dualistic, however objects do not exist without a subject, and that the subjective and the world arise together. Reality precedes our perception of separate objects, however it is legitimate to speak of the apparent two dimensions, even if only in appearance.

Rupert asks, ‘Does awareness ever disappear?’, in response to a man who says that he has moments of unity but feels that he loses it again and again. Rupert suggests he go to the experience of being aware and ask if it has limitations or if it is contained within a body. The man then shares that as a small boy he asked himself, ‘If my parents never existed, would I exist?’ Rupert suggests that is the best question he can ask himself as it came from his own being. He suggests that to answer it that he not reach back in history but instead go deeply into his existence.

The understanding is here but without feelings; there is an absence of love and a sense of the impersonal. Rupert suggests that the first quality in recognition is peace regardless of experience, which eventually bubbles over into peace and joy internally. Love has to do with outward-facing experience which can come later in the midst of friendship and community and eventually extends to everyone and everything with the recognition of shared being.

Rupert suggests that the mind and body are seeking liberation in response to a woman who is experiencing pain while meditating. Rupert says that it’s a good sign that she is experiencing these things because her strong self-image hasn’t allowed much room for the more difficult elements of her mind to emerge. Now that she is resting in being with no agenda, no seeking or resisting, these elements of her mind are bubbling up and seeking liberation. Rupert suggests that she remain as the open empty space of awareness and allow them to go through the experience they need to, unless it becomes too difficult.

Why are we drawn to only one person or a few people, in light of our shared reality? Rupert suggests that the nature of relationship accommodates the apparent limits of an individual, in that we cannot relate to billions of people but can experience this shared being readily with those around us, such as in sexual intimacy. And these limits vary according to the individual conditioning or inclination.

A woman asks, 'Is there a benefit to dissociation?’ when she shares her experience as the witness, which she found to be dissociative. Rupert suggests that we normally think that the ‘I’, the body-mind, is the subject of experience, and the world is the object. In fact, it is ‘I’, awareness, that is the subject, and the body-mind and the world are the objects. Rupert elaborates on the Tantric and Vedantic paths as differing approaches to this.

What comes after awakening, or enlightenment, which Rupert has referred to as chapter one? Rupert responds that chapter 1 is the recognition 'I am awareness.' Chapter 2 is the recognition that awareness is eternal, ever-present and unlimited. Chapter 3 is the recognition that peace and happiness are the true nature of our being. Chapters 4-12 have to do with the collapse of the distinction between the subject and object, or between me, the world, and others. The book is never-ending because there is no limit in the extent to which an individual body-mind can be permeated and transfigured by this understanding; the body and mind can never be a perfect, final expression of truth.

Rupert elaborates that stillness appears as movement in response to a woman who says she can't comprehend how movement comes from stillness. Rupert suggests that movement and stillness are not two different things but are, instead, two different views of the same thing. All there is to the experience of thinking or sensing is the knowing of it. Using the analogy of the screen and image, he demonstrates how they are the same thing; one is transparent and the other a modulation of that transparency.

All religious and spiritual traditions suggest that reality is one. It is not something extraordinary, but simply that which is. It is said to be ‘not two’, or non-dual, because the sages considered it safer to say what reality is not, rather than defining what it is. All names describe parts, so no name can describe the whole. Why does reality appear as ten thousand things? Because we perceive it from a limited, localised point of view. It’s not possible for that which is limited to perceive that which is unlimited. If reality is one, there can be no limits, nor separation or independent selves. Reality never lies behind the world; it shines as the world. Reality can never be endarkened by experience, so there is no question of enlightenment. Appearances don’t change; it is our beliefs that subside as the inevitable consequence of this understanding. Uncaused peace emerges and suffuses all experience.

A man asks, ‘Are ‘I’ and knowingness the same?’ Rupert says that knowing, or consciousness, is all that is, has ever, or could ever, be known. We know that consciousness is real. We can’t be sure that what we are conscious of is real in the way that we perceive it, but our awareness of whatever it is is real. Even if the world is an illusion, it could not appear to something that is not real. That which knows cannot be an illusion. And who knows that there is consciousness? Consciousness, awareness aware of itself. When we say, ‘I know that I am aware’, the’ ‘I that knows and the experience of being aware is the same I. There is only knowing, knowing only knowing.

A woman asks about the role of beliefs in everyday decisions, such as flying during COVID, and whether beliefs are impersonal. Rupert responds that awareness doesn't share the limitations of belief. Therefore, awareness, not beliefs, are impersonal and is the source of causeless peace.

Rupert suggests how to deal with boredom for a man who feels anxious and bored. We feel bored when we feel incomplete and our boredom propels us toward something – it could be an object, substance or thinking – to bring a degree of relief, but then the thought process ends, and the emptiness and boredom rises again. Sooner or later, we have to face or our boredom or we will always be addicted to substances or activities. When we do, we will find no lack and discover what we previously sought in activities and substances.

What is meant by relationships in non-dual teachings? Rupert responds that the common understanding of relationship is dualistic, however objects do not exist without a subject, and that the subjective and the world arise together. Reality precedes our perception of separate objects, however it is legitimate to speak of the apparent two dimensions, even if only in appearance.

Rupert asks, ‘Does awareness ever disappear?’, in response to a man who says that he has moments of unity but feels that he loses it again and again. Rupert suggests he go to the experience of being aware and ask if it has limitations or if it is contained within a body. The man then shares that as a small boy he asked himself, ‘If my parents never existed, would I exist?’ Rupert suggests that is the best question he can ask himself as it came from his own being. He suggests that to answer it that he not reach back in history but instead go deeply into his existence.

The understanding is here but without feelings; there is an absence of love and a sense of the impersonal. Rupert suggests that the first quality in recognition is peace regardless of experience, which eventually bubbles over into peace and joy internally. Love has to do with outward-facing experience which can come later in the midst of friendship and community and eventually extends to everyone and everything with the recognition of shared being.

Rupert suggests that the mind and body are seeking liberation in response to a woman who is experiencing pain while meditating. Rupert says that it’s a good sign that she is experiencing these things because her strong self-image hasn’t allowed much room for the more difficult elements of her mind to emerge. Now that she is resting in being with no agenda, no seeking or resisting, these elements of her mind are bubbling up and seeking liberation. Rupert suggests that she remain as the open empty space of awareness and allow them to go through the experience they need to, unless it becomes too difficult.

Why are we drawn to only one person or a few people, in light of our shared reality? Rupert suggests that the nature of relationship accommodates the apparent limits of an individual, in that we cannot relate to billions of people but can experience this shared being readily with those around us, such as in sexual intimacy. And these limits vary according to the individual conditioning or inclination.

A woman asks, 'Is there a benefit to dissociation?’ when she shares her experience as the witness, which she found to be dissociative. Rupert suggests that we normally think that the ‘I’, the body-mind, is the subject of experience, and the world is the object. In fact, it is ‘I’, awareness, that is the subject, and the body-mind and the world are the objects. Rupert elaborates on the Tantric and Vedantic paths as differing approaches to this.

What comes after awakening, or enlightenment, which Rupert has referred to as chapter one? Rupert responds that chapter 1 is the recognition 'I am awareness.' Chapter 2 is the recognition that awareness is eternal, ever-present and unlimited. Chapter 3 is the recognition that peace and happiness are the true nature of our being. Chapters 4-12 have to do with the collapse of the distinction between the subject and object, or between me, the world, and others. The book is never-ending because there is no limit in the extent to which an individual body-mind can be permeated and transfigured by this understanding; the body and mind can never be a perfect, final expression of truth.

Rupert elaborates that stillness appears as movement in response to a woman who says she can't comprehend how movement comes from stillness. Rupert suggests that movement and stillness are not two different things but are, instead, two different views of the same thing. All there is to the experience of thinking or sensing is the knowing of it. Using the analogy of the screen and image, he demonstrates how they are the same thing; one is transparent and the other a modulation of that transparency.