Honestly, I had to laugh at a number of points in this awesome video, because Rupert is just soooo frikken brilliant. At times he’s a wordsmith like no other. At times he’s like an eminent scientist, dissecting our experience with a remarkable precision, and the sharpest scalpel on Earth lol. And his relentless logic, omg, it’s fierce lol ..... I’m really starting to GET this sh*t haha
I laughed several times because of the level of the guy asking the confused confusion ( I'm avoiding the word " questions " to express the chaos of the guy's ideas )
It will blow your mind even if you understand 1% of what he says...he is simply brilliant...wiser than most of the wise people living on earth. What he is taking about is the core teachings of Advaita Vedanta. It's difficult to understand, no doubt, but the difficulty comes from our strong attachments to the sense objects of the world. It's quite accessible to a pure and dispassionate mind.
My understanding is that when Rupert talk about awareness is not referring neither to the experienced object nor to the subject that react to the experience but to the ever present and continuous witnessing space in which both the experienced and the experiencer arise; In which they are known and out of it they are made.
Beautiful. When you walk each individual back, through their personal mind maze they got stuck in, there’s a peace that comes to me. Because I do find myself in dense mind puzzles such as this guy, so this discourse spoke directly to the deepest parts of me. Thanks Rupert 🙏🏾 and audience member guy... wherever ever you are 😉
Jonny Chaos If you go to thought for answers about life (or anything), the answer will seem chaotic and confusing. Thoughts/images are always coming and going; they’re not stable. Plus thought is always second-hand information; it doesn’t make for a reliable source. (It’s always past, so it can’t give you an eye-witness account). It’s better to go directly to life to get any information about it. Life is present right now, isn’t it? You don’t need thought when you can directly experience life for yourself. What do you find when you explore life itself instead of thought? What do you know of life without any kind of thought?
@Coscious Motivations: Rupert asked me to tell you: "It's just a test to see who's paying attention, for heaven's sake (!) Be patient . . . your prize is in the mail." Sheeesh . . .
The guy is saying that awareness of a perception of an object is not separate from the perception itself. Which is CORRECT! But the answer is that the perceptions are also made of that consciousness.
Thanks Rupert. Counciousness is not awareness. Even if we are in a spiritual way or a thecnician way, as you say. I honestly think (I will appreciate your answer) that we could use AWARENESS to explain wich it seems to have a "better approaching" to another word: UNVEILING. Thanks. From the SELF.
Indeed! I haven't noticed the absence of the flowers! Too absorbed in Rupert's powerful words. However, I enjoy having the "experience" of seeing colourful flowers!😊
"knowing" is shapeless and colorless, but the experience of seeing includes the appearance of shape and color. So to say that "all there is to seeing is the knowing of it" seems to miss something ... to ignore the phenomenal component of the experience of seeing.
He does another video entitled Awareness Equals Experience. Must the flowers which are to his right. I doubt thoughts can be experienced since they are insubstantial and the apparent cause of unreality. Just like trying to explain enlightenment, a non experience if the exercise is successful. We are now in Zen territory of the mind being transmuted by thought nullification.
It happen to me that many times when I hear the videos of Rupert for the 3rd or 5th times I found something new that I had not seen before In this case I had not realized the great signification of the idea of mixing the word God With the word “I” That is why Jesus insisted in the idea that “I and my Father are one” !!
Great video! One thing I wrestle with is these 3 dualities: # Continuity ----- Discontinuity # Linear ----- Non-linear # Consciousness/Known/Experience/Perceiving ----- Unconsciousness/Unknown/Non-experience/Not-perceiving Whatever it is, that is present underneath the above dualities, must be free of all of them. Which means "THAT" which I am is = NOT[continuous, discontinuous, linear, non-linear, conscious, unconscious]. It would have to be transcendent of all of the above dualities. The ultimate transcendent ONE modulates itself into all the dualities. It can appear as any of those, but it is in essence none of them. The essence of "THAT" is simply BEYOND ALL. it seems like the ultimate "THAT" is an ABSOLUTE NEGATION/EMPTINESS. But then it would also be an "ABSOLUTE AFFIRMATION/FULLNESS" of everything. I guess if I put it in any words, its opposite also would be true, resulting in a total contradiction. I can just speak in the EDGE of language, of sorts, but the seeing happens in the understanding. The essence of THAT could be explained as: It is ALL, It is NONE, It is both ALL and NONE, It is neither ALL nor none. Another thing that helps is to see all NOUNS as VERBS. It would imply, all of your perception is your ACTION, your CREATION. It is your DOING.
Yes ,Being extremely analytical drags the thoughts towards a climate of objects adding to recursive series of never-ending questions...smudging the vision....A leap beyond..into Emptiness/Fullness can be only answer.
"Another thing that helps is to see all NOUNS as VERBS." Have you ever earnestly abandoned your attention exploring the meaning of the space between words, doesn't matter if they are nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs, modal verbs, prepositions...? Try stopping there, it's quite pleasant.
@@Errrokay Hmm. I can kind of see what your saying. I find it hard to stop modulating reality into some kind of 'meaning'. It feels like I cannot relax to a point beyond the mind unless I am on top of things in a sense. Sorta like the mind is a plane, that I have to stabilize, before putting it on autopilot and enjoying the view in the side windows. I am guessing the mind can be dropped only after it has been fully balanced? Because otherwise with imbalances and me leaving control would crash the plane (primal terror chaos and madness...). Same would apply to the body too I would guess. To detach from both and be free, they both must be in a fully balanced state. It would seem like 'balance is freedom' from this reasoning. I am once again spiraling into thought...
@@deepak1987 "I find it hard to stop modulating reality into some kind of 'meaning'." Because we are hard wired to find patterns, from which we can hopefully predict the future, to better plan and therefore minimise uncertainty, of which we are afraid, the big bad unknown is out there waiting to happen, it will happen. Oh my god what will become of me... :) Fear is pain remembered, desire is pleasure remembered, to break the cycle look again at your sentence, modulating is happening, modulating is unfolding, the subject and object at either end of modulating aren't real, if you don't believe me put your attention on the source of the subject, drift with it, there is nothing to fear as everything is as it should be.
@@Errrokay "Fear is pain remembered, desire is pleasure remembered" is interesting. Hmm, so its about shifting the attention to the source. Pain is an interesting thing though, it forces you to pay attention to it. I feel like if I do that, I may have to just sit through oodles of pain trying to grab my attention to do something about it. I've seen most of my compulsions are about escaping this underlying pain and agitation. So my actions are mostly "reactions" rather than true actions. I would say true action is holy, would be something that comes from the whole i.e. 'The whole moving the whole'. When I get still, and in the journey to stillness, there are all these layers and subtleties of indescribable pains. The problem is, once I sink into those pains, they dominate my experience for quite a while, and I would need good powerful distractions to once again shift my attention back to a kind of dissociation of outside preoccupations which comes as a relief (which maybe a regressive step though when it comes to going closer to stillness). To simply let the immense pains be, is the challenge. I just run out of willpower after trying hard (like a sprint race), then desperately indulge in pleasures, and the will power gathers again, and I try the same again. That seems to be another cycle. I kina feel helpless, I cannot sit with the pain, because it is too much, finishes up the will power gathered, and then it pushes me into the opposite of indulgence to dissociate and get out of it. Then there is the semi-conscious chronic fatigue that hangovers for days. Where again I am just compulsively trying to self-soothe. I guess there is a deep resistance in the core of my being, that has to be dissolved, for me to get to real stillness. This resistance is prolly what is manifesting as pain and avoidance. This state of chronic fatigue, loss of will and dread/despair and managing to stay afloat is a kind of dark night of the soul lasting years and years. All I need is energy, but I am so depleted now that it only comes in small quantities with every cycle of sleep. I feel like all my desires are originating as an escape to this core of resistance deep in my being. And I have extreme desires, which I feel maybe an equivalent compensation for the kind of resistance present deep inside. My mind has tried and thought millions of things, but I am still helpless against this resistance. The solution is extremely straight and simple, but yet so difficult. Wish I could just go to the deep sleep state with full consciousness.
At the begining the spiritual ego wants to be recognized as enlightened. When it feels recognised it thanks rupper. Rupper : i'm not quit finished you see. Ego : oh shit.
Rupert - Does this mean To exist and live well , the only and only thing we must take care of is 'our physical body (Brain being a part here)and energy levels' without being identified with them and just do two things with the mind - Free it and understand it to use it as needed.(of course clearly knowing that it's not me). Does this make sense?
Im no Rupert but i would argue to live well we must also take care of other characters in this play, as well as the stage. Both mean we are still taking care of ourselves, just not limiting that to our 'self' that exists within this body. Everything and everyone is us, and we must strive to take care of that whole, rather than just our limited window into that whole.
What we experience are the qualities of the impressions we receive from our experience via the 5 senses. We do not experience our partner's hand, we experience the qualities of the sensations in our hand.
Experiencing something is not the same as being aware of something. You can be aware of a Dream but is it an experience? I don't think the 2 is synonymous.
How do we move through a purely intellectual understanding of Advaita Vedanta to a non-conceptual experience. I feel I understand what is being taught, but it's not making any difference…same fears, same anxieties, same old me?
Continuity to experience is given by memory, not awareness or I. Timelessness and "being continuous/always present" are not the same thing at all. Being continuous implies a spanning over a certain time. Timelessness is not related to time. It is without time-completely unrelated to its flow. Experience does not have a backdrop of a constant I. Even the imaginary gap between two experiences is just another mode of perceiving; another object. All consciousness/knowing is of separation between the subject and the object of consciousness. This has nothing to do with awareness or the "real I" (there is no real I but using the idiom). A new perceiver arises with every mode of experience and subsides with every changing experience. There are an infinite number of different I's corresponding to each experience. This is consciousness, being conscious of something (it is talked here as "being aware of" which is not apt in my humble opinion). You can only be conscious of your own projection, not aware. There is no constant I except the one imagined in the present moment. If that present I disappears, all the other constant I's also show themselves as illusory. Take away all your memories and capacity to remember anything and tell me, are you a continuous watcher? Is there future? Is there past? Is there even you to see this anymore? This is not an experience to be had; it is a dissolution of something extra and can only be understood via a very subtle insight which has nothing to do with awareness/consciousness. It is something deeper. Sublimation of consciousness is Awareness. Not this "I which is constant beneath experience". There is no I constant beneath experience and once this is seen, one of the most strong knots in the way of actual realization is loosened.
@@kwixotic That constant 'I' is not awareness. It is the I-tendency.. This kind of teaching is very misleading for this very reason. You are not awareness which is Truth. You are consciousness which is duality. Spirituality is nlt about enforcing this false 'I' as awareness. It is about recognizing it as consciousness and going beyond it. You probably understood me correctly; I am going against Rupert's teaching here.
@@harik3842 It is the othet way around. The I is carried in memory; not memory in I. Remove all your memories and you disappear. Yes, something will remain, but not anything that you will know. You, even as the conscious one/the seer, are merely a product thought and identification with consciousness. Spiritual practice at its higher level is not about reminding oneself of the 'I' being constantly there as a witness; it is about dissociating oneself from the one who sees and hence all objects that come with it.
So, This is all it's- I am the awareness/conciousness/Brahman/Life which is aware of all the objects : 1. Physical body- Must be kept well ..(Food, Water + Rest+ Activity+ Whatever different works for different people) (Brain is included here ). 2. Mental body (Mind ). No need to do anything to it unlike the physical body. Just free it and understand its dimensions (intellect, identity, memory, imagination, subconscious mind .. logical side etc) to put it into use for everyday life. 3. Energy levels - Trying to keep it as best as possible. 4. The world, relationships and all other objects - do it as it works for you . Sounds Good?😊
As I mentioned on your other comment, my only disagreement would be on point 4: "Do it as it works for you". Id argue do it as it works for as many people as possible as well as yourself and the world. They are all you. But other than that sounds good man
The most important thing to know about it is... Awareness cannot be objectified ever. If you try to catch hold of it...the one that is trying to catch hold of is the actual awareness. It's the real subject which must not be objectified . Just to clearly know and accept that it's me. That's all.
@@dhirajgabeja586 why knowing that we are the awareness of our thoughts, sensations, perceptions erc makes a difference? Even I understand it, will I be happier because of that? If so, why/how?
Awareness is the infinite very Man, the one only God. Ordinarily layers separate us from Him, spiritual layers and natural layers, for, were He to fill us with himself without the layering, we would be Him. So, we 'wear' the layers, as if they are our own body and mind, and are therefore a-ware. Namaste!
Isn't it an assumption that there is nothing to an object other than our experiencing and knowing of it? It seems sort of sophistical. How could we discover something about an object that was previously unknown? doesn't this suggest that the object has some sort of reality of its own and what we see is only an approximation of it? Otherwise it almost suggests that we are creating something as we are experiencing it.
Yes thats correct, your last sentence is the conclusion of quantum mechanics as well as non-duality. Reality is in continual flux, a superposition of potential energy, down to the “smallest” particles. The conscious observer enters, and collapses this superposition into whatever configuration is needed at the moment. This is happening at such a speed that our mind doesnt register it, but its similar to frames of a movie moving at a fast enough rate that it appears as one continuous story.
isn't conscious awareness knowing, not just awareness? There is such a thing as unconscious awareness. So it seems that knowing is limited by consciousness.
Knowing IS the expression or modulation of Awareness/Consciousness. And there could't be an "unconscious" Awareness.(unless one has a Freudian based agenda).
@@kwixotic there is unconscious awareness. It has been shown that we are aware of things that we are not consciously aware of. Awareness and existence are one and the same thing. Every "thing" is aware but not necessarily consciously aware. Every expression of awareness has a "thing" even if that "thing" is awareness itself. In fact the "thing" that awareness is always aware of is awareness itself. Nothing more, nothing less and nothing else. Conscious awareness is another manifestation of awareness.
@@jrhammond95003 There can be an "intuitive" based awareness in which I might sense that I'm aware of something for instance that something isn't what it would seem to be. Is that what would constitute unconscious awareness? Also "things" appear in Awareness so is that what you mean when saying that every expression of awareness has a "thing" even if that thing is Awareness itself?(except that Rupert has said Awareness as such couldn't be considered a thing because it has no qualities which characterize things).
@@kwixotic but what characterizes a thing other than it is what awareness is aware of? Can more really be said? Everything has a level of awareness from the smallest particle to the most complex animate object like us. Without awareness there is no particle, without a particle there is no awareness. The question is, what does awareness and existence arise from? Rupert seems to think that is awareness itself but that is not my experience. My experience is that awareness and existence arises out of Oneness or Reality. Awareness and existence are the appearance of Reality and so a kind of illusion. The closer you get to sitting in pure awareness the closer is your experience of the fundamental nature of Oneness or Reality. The closer is your experience of pure connection and unbounded freedom, Oneness.
@@jrhammond95003 I believe Rupert as well as other teachers of the non-duality school would contend that Awareness IS synonymous with or identical to Oneness so that it isn't a case of the Awareness arising out of Oneness.
Do you think awareness gives you different information the further along the path you are? I used to follow Eckhart and Mooji primarily. I subbed to Rupert but didn't watch his videos much. I watched one last week an it caused so many 'penny dropped' moments i've ended up watching his videos for hours every day since. I feel like if i'd watched this 2 years ago it would have sounded like a bunch of alien jargon, but now practically EVERYTHING he says makes sense and I understand it. The main question is though, if I can fully understand it and know deep down it's real, why is it still not shining through more than the person. Saying that i've only been watching as much the last week haha probably being impatient.
In response to your question I would say: it's just habit and the interest is still there to play as the person. Like mooji says in one story. You have found the celestial gem but you tie it to your donkey and keep digging for precious stones. Your question also rings true in my heart
Yes, eckhart and mooji are good at the beginning, they cast a wide net and have a huge audience. As you get closer you will probably want to look for others, rupert and osho are good, osho has all his material available free.. All the spiritual jargon aside, enlightenment can be viewed as a purely scientific process.. and it may be more helpful to do so actually. This process is a gradual dissolving of the ego (default mode network in neuroscientific terms). This generally takes some time, in the months to years range, depending on how much “mud” you have inside. Shoot me a message if you need any help, im cheaper than rupert ;)
@@TheJooberjones Yes, agree in the sense that Eckhardt and perhaps Mooji(even with the scandals surrounding him) are good for a "generic" understanding. But the more that one then "shifts" into an experiential grasp from where Rupert comes at it, the more then one's understanding translates into this "de-egoization" if I could call it that.
I recommend you to read Spinoza and Hegel if you like Rupert Spira's teachings. You will go deeper and deeper in this topic and it will help you clear your confusions.
