Why ‘I’ Is the Highest Name

When I go beyond witness consciousness, there’s no ‘I’ there – just presence. Wouldn’t it be more effective to use ‘non-I’ rather than ‘I am’ when teaching? Rupert says: ‘To refer to what is not is completely meaningless. It’s just an intellectual abstraction. Why, if you are a meditation teacher, would you want to refer to what is not? Why would you not want to talk about what is? If reality itself were to give itself a name, it would call itself “I”, because “I” is the name that that which knows itself gives to itself. “I” is the only word in the English language that doesn’t introduce duality. In order to name God “God”, we have to stand apart from God and say, “God is”, but God would never say “God is”. God would say, “I am”. “I” is the best word in the English language. It’s better than “God” even.’

I have many questions throughout the day and wonder if they’re necessary or a hindrance. Should I drop them, and how does this affect understanding? Rupert says: ‘If you have a question, ask it, but dropping a question doesn’t put an end to the question. If it’s a real question, then the question sooner or later will come back again. What I used to do in the early days with Francis (Lucille), if I had a question, I would sit on it for two or three days, and I would really refine it so that when I asked it, it was one or two sentences. There’s a real art to asking a question. And the more clearly and succinctly your question is formulated, the more likely you are to get a satisfactory answer. Only ask the questions that remain with you for a few days, or those really deep questions that won’t leave you alone.’

How do different types of minds affect realisation? Does having an inquisitive mind versus a calm one make a difference? Rupert says: ‘It doesn’t make any difference at all. The truth or reality is equally available to all minds, irrespective of their condition. So, if your mind is very complex and full of questions, as yours is, as mine was, then you have to ask all your questions. You have to think everything through. The understanding is always the same because understanding is what stands under. The teaching is the verbal expression of the understanding, which is unique to each person that speaks about it. Understanding, itself, is formless. It’s a taste of your true nature, and it’s always the same for everyone.’

You said time only seems to exist when we think, but I never experience anything getting younger. Even when we don’t think, things fall apart. Is decay just conditioning? Rupert says: ‘Anything that exists, or seems to exist, appears – it arises from being, it exists briefly, and it subsides into being. So, when we look at the arising of something, and when we look at the subsiding of that thing, they appear differently. The subsiding of something into being appears as decay, the arising of something from being appears as growth. It appears as time to a finite mind. In reality, nothing is born and nothing dies. Why? Because all there is in reality is the ever-present screen. That which is, never ceases to be. And that which is not, never comes into existence. The appearance and disappearance, growth and decay, birth and death, these are all of the mind.’

When I investigate, I see that colours are made of seeing, and seeing arises in awareness. But what is the seeing made of? In Kashmir Shaivism, there’s consciousness and something else – what is that other element? Rupert says: ‘All there is to the experience of seeing is consciousness knowing. If you take the experience of seeing and you, so to speak, touch it, the only substance present there is knowing consciousness. You are looking at a sight, an appearance. The appearance that you are seeing is an appearance of something. What is it that is appearing to you as the world? Consciousness. All that is happening right now is that consciousness is experiencing itself. You have to be very careful, because if you are saying that all there is to the world is your private experience of seeing, then you are going dangerously towards solipsism.’

You’ve presented models of solipsism and universal consciousness, but neither can be absolutely proven. I can’t say with certainty that awareness is universal or created in the brain. Rupert says: ‘It’s a perfectly reasonable position. The only thing one can say with absolute certainty is that “I am”, or that “consciousness is”. If you wanted me to speak the absolute truth during these gatherings, I would remain silent the entire week. Nothing I say – with the exception of “I am” – is absolutely true. The models of reality that I build are imperfect models. For some of us with complex minds, questioning minds, investigative minds, these are the conversations that break up the mind’s certainties, the mind’s rigidities; that soften us, that open us. I don’t think our two points of view are that different.’

I keep reading that God’s creations are eternal, but everything I observe fluctuates and dissolves. How can something created be eternal when creation exists in time? Rupert says: ‘Anything that’s created must have a form. Anything that has a form can be named. Anything that is created exists, or seems to exist, and therefore, at least in its created form, cannot be eternal. Because if something is created, by definition it exists in some dimension. Only being is eternal. Something created cannot be eternal because eternal means out of time. If something’s created, it’s by definition in time. You’d have to stretch the common meaning of the word “created” to accommodate that statement.’

You’ve spoken of other dimensions regarding UFOs. How do dimensions relate to faculties of mind, and how could beings from other dimensions break through? Rupert says: ‘A human mind experiences reality in four dimensions, three dimensions of space, and one dimension of time. Why couldn’t consciousness arise in the form of other types of mind? Not thinking and perceiving, but other activity forms that it could arise in. Imagine consciousness perceived through three faculties, it would perceive itself as a universe that appeared not in four dimensions, but in five dimensions. Dimensions correspond to the faculties of mind through which they are perceived. It’s highly unlikely that there aren’t other kinds of mind. Maybe from time to time, some aspect of nature that our minds don’t normally capture does intersect with our world and appears as a UFO.’

When I rest in awareness as awareness, can I experience sensations? What’s the relationship between infinite and finite experience? Rupert says: ‘Strictly speaking, the infinite knows nothing of the finite. If something finite like a sensation were to appear within the infinite, it would displace a little bit of the infinite, and then the infinite would no longer be infinite. But if we want to come down just one step from the top of the mountain, then we can concede that the infinite can know a sensation through the faculty of a finite mind. You can still have your perceiving faculties without the belief in separation. The separate self is a belief, not an entity, a belief that the faculties of the finite mind enclose a separate independently existing self.’

When I step back from thoughts trying to be being, I can’t tell if it’s my mind mimicking being or the real thing. I feel lost. Rupert says: ‘Your finite mind consists of the faculties of thinking and perceiving, plus consciousness. We normally think that the consciousness with which our mind knows or perceives is limited by our faculties of thought and perception. But the consciousness aspect of your mind is like the space aspect of this room. It’s not really limited. The consciousness that seems to be bounded by your faculties of thought and perception is the vast, unlimited, infinite consciousness. Your finite mind is not really a finite mind. The consciousness part of your mind is infinite. You are trying to reach for it. And it is that very effort to reach for it that is subtly objectifying it and is keeping it as a blank object. It’s your wanting to grasp it that is projecting blankness onto the peace of your true nature.’

I was happy watching the sunrise, then came to meditate and thought: this spiritual thing seems like a hoax – trying to get rid of something that doesn’t exist and become something I already am. Rupert says: ‘Here we are not trying to get rid of something that doesn’t exist, nor are we trying to become what we already are. You are seeking for as long as you need to seek. But, if you seek intelligently, it inevitably brings itself to its own ending. Your seeking has undone itself. That’s good. Don’t criticise yourself for seeking – it was necessary. We seek in the world. Then we begin to seek in the spiritual world. And that’s just a refinement of our conventional search. But sooner or later that seeking is undone through understanding. In the end, retreats no longer feel like retreats, but there’s something very beautiful and precious about being together with a group of people like this.’

I was sinking back into being regularly, but world events affect me intensely. I wake up feeling shaken. I need social media for business but see constant horror there. How can I see this as illusion? Rupert says: ‘You have a highly strung, sensitive disposition and that makes you very sensitive and empathetic. But it also means that you take in trauma from your surroundings very undefended. Understanding deeply that ultimately the world as it appears to us is illusory is not going to change that. I don’t feel the right response for you is just to talk again about the illusory nature of the world. I would give you much more practical advice. Just stay off social media. Give your nervous system a break. It’s traumatised. Just do whatever you need to do to take care of people, but give your nervous system a rest. It’s like you’re drinking strong black coffee every night and then wondering why you can’t sleep. Stop stimulating your system.’