Defending Truth, Not Ego

What idea or understanding is one ingesting when taking psychedelics? Rupert says: ‘When I suggest the physical world is what the activity of consciousness looks like from our localised perspectives, what we’re really taking in when you take a substance is made of that pure intelligence, so it is a form of that intelligence. But I don’t know what its content is in terms of mind. Why go via psychedelics or indeed any other substance or activity when you can go there directly?’

Would it be fair to say that you might be a metaphysical locksmith, slowly unpicking the lock to help us open the door to awareness? Rupert says: ‘I’m hesitating because locks are very complex. But what I’m talking about is very simple and it’s not behind a locked door. It doesn’t require unlocking. Your being, it’s more intimate and more familiar and more well known and closer to you than your breath. I’m just drawing your attention to the space in this room, which you are, in fact, always, by definition, experiencing.’

How does being Jewish and defending ourselves individually and as a people square with holding this understanding? Rupert says: ‘To identify oneself with any group, I think it’s a mistake. It’s fine to belong to a group. But in your heart, I think we should be completely free of any identification. Whilst I don’t mean to say that it’s not legitimate to have your group. But if you identify yourself with it, you by definition, you separate yourself from other people. Most of the great wars are wars between people who disagree with what each other’s teacher said. So, it’s fine to derive your social life and everything from your Jewish community, but in your heart, keep your heart free.’

What about that feeling of being under attack, or the fear of genuine attack? Rupert says: ‘If it’s a genuine attack, physical danger, then you must do whatever you need to do to protect yourself. Don’t spend much time, in fact, don’t spend any time defending a wounded ego. But if appropriate, do defend the truth. When you hear some of the great statesmen, you feel the impersonal weight of the truth behind them. If you’re speaking on behalf of the truth, it gives you great courage, great power, very often charisma.’

Can you give advice on how we can bring this understanding into the pursuit of our careers? Rupert says: ‘I think the ideal is that the work you do is an expression of your deepest love and understanding. The main consideration is, is this work that I’m doing, does it have the potential to communicate this understanding. How can I best use all of that, my body and my mind, in service of love and understanding? And if you do that, you’ll have tremendous enthusiasm for what you do. People will be touched by that. You’re doing it because you love to do it.’

Do you think that AI is a strong expression of the ego? Rupert says: ‘No, it’s neutral with respect to the ego. It can be used in the service of the ego, but it can also be used in service of understanding and love. There are enormous amounts of applications where AI can be hugely beneficial. Only consciousness is conscious. Consciousness is not a property of a human being.’

In terms of the Direct Path, do I have to work through my subconscious? Rupert says: ‘The Direct Path means the path that takes you directly from who you seem to be to who you truly are. So yes, in the Direct Path, you avoid dealing with all the material in the subconscious on your way back to your true nature. But then when you turn around again and go back into your life, you have to deal with it on the way back. Even in your depression, in your anxiety and your loneliness, your being is still shining there and is therefore still available.’

How do you think that your training as an artist and understanding of the creative process informs your understanding and expression of non-duality? Rupert says: ‘Both started with being deeply touched, in the case of my artistic training, by the experience of beauty. In terms of my current work, by the experience of truth. I completely, utterly devoted myself to him. Somehow through this indirect cooking together, gardening, shopping. The teaching was transmitted non-verbally most of the time. Just like in the pottery, I developed my own language, not through trying, not through trying to be original or different, just because my character began to shine through.

I had an inner hatred to everyone and everything, and my biggest fear is from when I used to look after my mother with dementia. There are times I’d rather not be. Rupert says: ‘You’re using the story of your life to reinforce your suffering. You could use exactly the same story to reinforce your innate happiness if you chose to. Why don’t you tell us about all the things that have been given to you? You have an amazing life. It’s time for you to move on. You’re an inspiration to many, many people in this community.’

Please explain about the model of consciousness you’ve been referring to and how the soul fits in with that. Rupert says: ‘The soul is an old-fashioned English word for the mind. I would say that the soul was the entirety of the mind. It’s the entirety of your personal mind. Not just your waking state mind. The mind isn’t ego. The ego is the belief that what you are is defined by and limited to the mind. The same mind remains available to you. The faculties of thought and perception remain available to you. But they’re now used in the service of truth rather than in the service of the ego.’

How is it that I perceive my thoughts and my feelings? Rupert says: ‘You’re not perceiving them, you’re knowing them. You only perceive something that you perceive through seeing, hearing, touching, tasting, and smelling. You can’t see, hear, touch, taste, or smell your thoughts. But you know them. Because you, the medium in which they appear, the white paper, is made of knowing. It’s pure consciousness knowing its own activity. Pure consciousness knowing pure consciousness.’

Is it all right, or even necessary, to do all three paths – Progressive, Direct, and Pathless? Rupert says: ‘The impulse behind both the Progressive Path and the Direct Path is the magnetic pull, the gravitational pull of your being. Any combination of the three in any order is possible and reasonable. You can go back and forth. You can experiment with all three.’

How can we bring this understanding to our lives and decisions, and could you speak on impersonal decisions? Rupert says: ‘An impersonal decision is a decision that arises on behalf of love and understanding. You want to make sure that you don’t refer back to a feeling of being unloved. And so you want to be sure that you refer back to your essential self and its inherent intelligence and love and to make the decision from there. Your intention will keep you safe.’

Is it accurate to say that this unfolding is not a growth of awareness itself, but rather a process in which the finite mind becomes clearer? Rupert says: ‘The mind can either be full of the concerns and the fears and the neuroses and the insecurities of the ego. Or it can be, to a large extent, free of those qualities, in which case the bright light of awareness shines unobstructed through it. It’s the mind that gets clearer. Awareness doesn’t get clearer. It’s just a white radiance of eternity.’

It’s been my understanding that consciousness wants to know itself. Rupert says: ‘That’s like saying the sun wants to illuminate itself. Consciousness doesn’t know what ignorance is because it is pure knowing. So there’s no ignorance in consciousness. It’s inevitable that a finite mind will have an impulse within it. I don’t recommend trying to discipline your desires. But I recommend having desires that arise on behalf of love and understanding.’

If my life is sort of in a way ruled by this analogy, am I simplifying it too much? Rupert says: ‘No, no, it’s good . . . all you ever experience . . . All you Michael the person . . . It’s all you infinite consciousness ever experience is yourself . . . And perhaps of all my metaphors, it’s the one with the most explanatory power . . . So it’s a good, beautiful metaphor to live by.’

How can I express love and understanding to people whose character I find difficult? Rupert says: ‘You have to take those people as your sadhana. Because you never love the person. You love their being. Love is the recognition that you share your being with them. The being of everybody is exactly the same, irrespective of their characters. Sometimes a fierce no is required and it doesn't always come with a sweet smile. But inside your heart there's no enmity.’