The Obscuration of Being

A woman talks about her convictions that she is letting go of as her understanding deepens. Rupert suggests that the only comforting conviction he can offer is that what we essentially are needs no comforting or reassuring. It is always at ease and at peace. That doesn't mean we say this to people who don't share this understanding.

A woman asks about Rupert's comment that 'the teacher and the teaching should be your final disappointment.' This caused her to feel disillusioned until she realised she's not separate from the teaching. Rupert clarifies that what he means by that is that we have been seeking fulfilment in objects and failed, so we've given up hope of finding it in objective experience. Then we turn to a teacher and invest all that hope onto the teacher. They're the last chance for happiness. Sooner or later, we have to withdraw that dependence.

A woman cites the line ‘eternity is in love with the productions of time’ as well as ‘eternity knows nothing of the productions of time’. Rupert affirms that consciousness loves the productions of time by being the productions of time. The only way to know or love someone is to become that one, the collapse of the subject–object experience. We either know someone or we love them; we can't do both.

A man describes non-volitional energetic physical symptoms, or kriyas. Rupert uses the analogy of telling a joke, which is a winding up of tension until the punch line releases that tension. He calls it a spiritual kriya. The storyteller is pulling us into the future, and it comes to an end at the punch line when we are plunged into the present, into our true nature. This is what happens in recognition.

A man shares his grasp of the understanding thus far and asks how to avoid nihilism. Rupert suggests that from God’s point of view nothing is happening, but when it seems to localise itself, it seems to become finite and seems to perceive finite objects. Rupert then uses the Mary and Jane metaphor to elaborate. For the one, there is just itself.

A man asks, ‘If it’s a dream, how can we make the world a better place?’ Rupert says that as a concession to the separate self, we take action in the world. However, there are some, like Ramana Maharshi, who rarely make that concession. He said, ‘What world?’ However, even he made concessions to some.

A recently married woman asks how to apply this teaching to her marriage. Rupert responds that love is not what we do, it's what we are. Nor is it a relationship. It's the collapse of the subject–object distinction, which is love. The apparent two are revealed as one. Love is the absence of separation.

A man asks about the science of consciousness. Rupert suggests that the science of consciousness is self-enquiry. The science of anything is the exploration of that thing. What is it that would explore consciousness? Consciousness, which is being aware of being aware. King Lear cannot study John Smith, which is what all other so-called studies of consciousness is – objective phenomenon.

A man says he is wishing for a loving partner in life and asks how to go about that. Rupert responds that he can share his own experience which may or may not be helpful, which is to pray to God that God shows up in your objective life in a form that shines with all the qualities of God's infinite being, for which you cannot distinguish your devotion to them from your devotion to God. So they are the first face of God for you. Rupert says not to go for anything less than this.

A man asks about deep sleep and death. Rupert suggests that every night when we fall asleep, it is a rehearsal for death. However, when we die, there is no guarantee that we will make the transition in the same way that we do when we fall asleep.

A woman describes an experience whereby she became unconscious and ended up in an ambulance. She asks if there was ever a break in who she is, in consciousness. Rupert says there is no break. There may have been no experience, but the mind calls that a blank because it cannot know consciousness. There's only one consciousness, infinite and indivisible.

A man asks why when we are in deep sleep we hear our alarm. Rupert suggests that we hear it because consciousness is there. Perceiving is not switched off and on; it’s a dimmer switch.

A man says that he struggles with the idea of being not knowing, or not having intelligence. Rupert suggests that knowing arises from being. The understanding is consciousness’s knowledge of itself. Reasoning takes place in the mind; consciousness is pure knowledge. The experience of understanding is always the same experience, but it can be formulated in different ways.

A man shares his experience after an accident and asks if it was a bardo state. Rupert says yes. Perceptions and sensations left him. He was in a mental realm, an intermediary state.

A woman asks about memory after relaying two experiences, in which she pieced together her memory. Rupert suggests that memories exist in the files in your mind. Relaxing helps with recall, but it doesn't give access to all memories. Memory exists in you, not you in your memory.

A man shares his love of the beauty of mathematical equations. Rupert suggests that beauty is the nature of consciousness. These equations give you a taste of the nature of reality. It is a pathway to consciousness.

A man asks how to understand that consciousness is not taking place in the brain. Rupert suggests that there is no scientific proof that consciousness isn’t taking place in the brain. How could something finite prove consciousness knowledge of itself. It is self-evident. The methodology of science has to expand.

A man asks Rupert about a metaphor he used. Rupert suggests that analogies are limited. The paper with the hole in it, however, is a little portal at the heart of mind. That hole is immeasurable vaster than the piece of paper, because when you go through it, you slip out of time into eternity.

A woman asks for suggestions about how to help her mother who has dementia. Rupert suggests that he isn't sure he has anymore to offer. Be with her with love. Be fearless.

A woman shares her experience of nearly falling off a steep trail before being weightlessly moved away, out of danger. Rupert suggests that is an example of an angel being at your side and moving you aside. Our senses and perceptions don't pick up so much.

A woman asks about losing aha moments. Rupert suggests that the aha -- being -- is always the same, but there is just the obscuration of it. The screen is always there.

A man asks about death. Rupert suggests that being remains as it eternally is and death is just the losing of an apparent limitation. Memory may not go away completely. Thinking and imagining may persist, even though sensing and perceiving doesn’t.

A woman talks about her convictions that she is letting go of as her understanding deepens. Rupert suggests that the only comforting conviction he can offer is that what we essentially are needs no comforting or reassuring. It is always at ease and at peace. That doesn't mean we say this to people who don't share this understanding.

A woman asks about Rupert's comment that 'the teacher and the teaching should be your final disappointment.' This caused her to feel disillusioned until she realised she's not separate from the teaching. Rupert clarifies that what he means by that is that we have been seeking fulfilment in objects and failed, so we've given up hope of finding it in objective experience. Then we turn to a teacher and invest all that hope onto the teacher. They're the last chance for happiness. Sooner or later, we have to withdraw that dependence.

A woman cites the line ‘eternity is in love with the productions of time’ as well as ‘eternity knows nothing of the productions of time’. Rupert affirms that consciousness loves the productions of time by being the productions of time. The only way to know or love someone is to become that one, the collapse of the subject–object experience. We either know someone or we love them; we can't do both.

A man describes non-volitional energetic physical symptoms, or kriyas. Rupert uses the analogy of telling a joke, which is a winding up of tension until the punch line releases that tension. He calls it a spiritual kriya. The storyteller is pulling us into the future, and it comes to an end at the punch line when we are plunged into the present, into our true nature. This is what happens in recognition.

A man shares his grasp of the understanding thus far and asks how to avoid nihilism. Rupert suggests that from God’s point of view nothing is happening, but when it seems to localise itself, it seems to become finite and seems to perceive finite objects. Rupert then uses the Mary and Jane metaphor to elaborate. For the one, there is just itself.

A man asks, ‘If it’s a dream, how can we make the world a better place?’ Rupert says that as a concession to the separate self, we take action in the world. However, there are some, like Ramana Maharshi, who rarely make that concession. He said, ‘What world?’ However, even he made concessions to some.

A recently married woman asks how to apply this teaching to her marriage. Rupert responds that love is not what we do, it's what we are. Nor is it a relationship. It's the collapse of the subject–object distinction, which is love. The apparent two are revealed as one. Love is the absence of separation.

A man asks about the science of consciousness. Rupert suggests that the science of consciousness is self-enquiry. The science of anything is the exploration of that thing. What is it that would explore consciousness? Consciousness, which is being aware of being aware. King Lear cannot study John Smith, which is what all other so-called studies of consciousness is – objective phenomenon.

A man says he is wishing for a loving partner in life and asks how to go about that. Rupert responds that he can share his own experience which may or may not be helpful, which is to pray to God that God shows up in your objective life in a form that shines with all the qualities of God's infinite being, for which you cannot distinguish your devotion to them from your devotion to God. So they are the first face of God for you. Rupert says not to go for anything less than this.

A man asks about deep sleep and death. Rupert suggests that every night when we fall asleep, it is a rehearsal for death. However, when we die, there is no guarantee that we will make the transition in the same way that we do when we fall asleep.

A woman describes an experience whereby she became unconscious and ended up in an ambulance. She asks if there was ever a break in who she is, in consciousness. Rupert says there is no break. There may have been no experience, but the mind calls that a blank because it cannot know consciousness. There's only one consciousness, infinite and indivisible.

A man asks why when we are in deep sleep we hear our alarm. Rupert suggests that we hear it because consciousness is there. Perceiving is not switched off and on; it’s a dimmer switch.

A man says that he struggles with the idea of being not knowing, or not having intelligence. Rupert suggests that knowing arises from being. The understanding is consciousness’s knowledge of itself. Reasoning takes place in the mind; consciousness is pure knowledge. The experience of understanding is always the same experience, but it can be formulated in different ways.

A man shares his experience after an accident and asks if it was a bardo state. Rupert says yes. Perceptions and sensations left him. He was in a mental realm, an intermediary state.

A woman asks about memory after relaying two experiences, in which she pieced together her memory. Rupert suggests that memories exist in the files in your mind. Relaxing helps with recall, but it doesn't give access to all memories. Memory exists in you, not you in your memory.

A man shares his love of the beauty of mathematical equations. Rupert suggests that beauty is the nature of consciousness. These equations give you a taste of the nature of reality. It is a pathway to consciousness.

A man asks how to understand that consciousness is not taking place in the brain. Rupert suggests that there is no scientific proof that consciousness isn’t taking place in the brain. How could something finite prove consciousness knowledge of itself. It is self-evident. The methodology of science has to expand.

A man asks Rupert about a metaphor he used. Rupert suggests that analogies are limited. The paper with the hole in it, however, is a little portal at the heart of mind. That hole is immeasurable vaster than the piece of paper, because when you go through it, you slip out of time into eternity.

A woman asks for suggestions about how to help her mother who has dementia. Rupert suggests that he isn't sure he has anymore to offer. Be with her with love. Be fearless.

A woman shares her experience of nearly falling off a steep trail before being weightlessly moved away, out of danger. Rupert suggests that is an example of an angel being at your side and moving you aside. Our senses and perceptions don't pick up so much.

A woman asks about losing aha moments. Rupert suggests that the aha -- being -- is always the same, but there is just the obscuration of it. The screen is always there.

A man asks about death. Rupert suggests that being remains as it eternally is and death is just the losing of an apparent limitation. Memory may not go away completely. Thinking and imagining may persist, even though sensing and perceiving doesn’t.