Rupert Spira

[enigma]

It looks like Rupert hasn't been talked about for a while. He has some remarkably clear ways of talking, and this 'Never Not Here' segment is a gem. (About an hour and a half long) Richard can be a bit anoying, but his heart is in the right place. Hehe.

[sherry]

Thank you very much for posting this, enigma. I am very appreciative of Rupert Spira's clear approach/teaching. ....truly a gem.

[vacant]

Thanks for the post E. Such unperturbed clarity!

And those parts where I want to slap Richard make me appreciate how much people like me can push the sages' patience. Lawd-a-mercy, sure makes me wanna shut-up.

[zenman]

Yea, Richard can be a pain. He definitely loves the sound of his own voice. There are some nevernothere clips of Paul Hedderman where Hedderman's best lines were edited together with no Richard. Sometimes I wish all their clips were like that. But hey, Richard has done an amazing job getting so many people interviewed and he does keep them talking too. I wouldn't know where to begin when it comes to keeping someone talking about this stuff for 90 minutes.

[nickbon]

Hi,
There are also very good interviews on the conscioustv website:)

[jazz]

Richard's actually really funny. "I'm just saying things, I don't know", haha

Thank you Enigma, it's been quite beneficial to listen to.

[Deleted]

kickin interview with Rupert Spira at Buddha at the Gas Pump:
batgap.com/rupert-spira/

Rick Archer, the generous, game and amiable interviewer really has a nice interaction with Spira. Very direct. It's the most out of element I've seen Archer yet, which was beautiful.

[gilana]

Thanks for the link. I'm going to meet Rupert soon, and it's good to get background.

He's very clear, isn't he?

Cheers!

[esponja]

Loving this guy! Thanks

[Deleted]

non-duality.rupertspira.com/read/consciousness_without_an_object

Consciousness Without An Object

As long as Consciousness-as-a-human-being appears in Consciousness, how is Consciousness ever without an object?

Dear Rupert,

You speak of Consciousness without an object, such as in deep sleep or the interval between objects, and I’ve also seen “non-objective Awareness” written about elsewhere. But even though the mind may be at rest during deep sleep, the body continues to function - heart, lungs, digestion, etc., and isn’t the even the darkness when we close our eyes an object - something, as opposed to nothing? So, my question is: as long as Consciousness-as-a-human-being appears in Consciousness, how is Consciousness ever without an object?

Deepest thanks as ever, and with love,

Steve



Dear Steve,

If we imagine that Consciousness truly has an object then it is very hard to understand or even be open to the possibility that Consciousness is present in the absence of objects.

However, Consciousness never, in fact, has an object. The idea of Consciousness plus an object is useful for establishing the primacy and presence of Consciousness, that is, it establishes Consciousness as the witness of experience.

However, the so called object that Consciousness witnesses is not, in fact, witnessed - it is much closer than that. It is itself ‘made out of’ Consciousness. In other words, there are never two things - Consciousness plus and object - there is always only Consciousness.

Having said that, let us look more closely to see if we ever know the experience of Consciousness without apparent objectivity.

Imagine someone tells us a joke. We hear the punch line, there is a short delay, we get the joke and laugh. What is actually happening? When do we actually understand the joke?

First we hear the joke and think about it - that is a thought in the mind. Then there is the understanding of the joke and finally laughter.

The understanding of the joke takes place, by definition, between the end of the joke and before the laughter.

If we look closely at this moment of understanding, it is a timeless non-objective moment. The line of thinking about the joke has come to an end and the formulation of the understanding, which is also a line of thinking, has not yet begun. In that timeless non-objective moment, what we call understanding takes place.

In fact, understanding always takes place outside the mind. A line of questioning or reasoning may precede it and a line of thought may formulate it but in between, when the mind is not present, understanding, which is simply the knowing of our own being or Consciousness without an object, takes place, or rather, knows itself.

Understanding always only understands itself. It ‘stands under’ the mind.

If you look in your experience you will find many such examples. One more, for instance…the moment we refer to when we say, “I suddenly became aware….” try to find that moment objectively and we cannot, but we refer to it from experience.

With love,

Rupert

[frustratedwanter]

Would like to recommend Rick Linchitz also. He and Rupert are recent discoveries to me.
Dispelling a lot of personal "enlightenment" mythologies.
Kind of disappointing, but I guess reality is better than myth.

[runstill]

Rupert is streaming live in 5 mins. google [ Sand Conference ] they ask for a donation but you don't have to give one to watch.

 

[Deleted]

From Psychology Tomorrow's article "Among the Nonduals: Exploring the True Nature of The Mind" “Perception is conventionally believed to be divided into two essential ingredients: an inside self or subject, and an outside world or object. The belief that all experience is divided this way underpins our entire world culture – how we think, feel, act, perceive and relate.”

His voice is gentle. “Look around you. We think we see a room. In fact, all we know or experience is our perception of the room or world. Do you ever know or come into contact with anything other than the knowing of your experience? It’s not possible. All we really find in experience is knowing.”

...

[further on in the article]

"For a journalist, it’s a slippery area to research, for everyone has a slightly different take on how to arrive at that underlying nondual reality, and what that reality actually entails. Different teachers emphasize their own way in, and usually disparage the other routes, which is why the elitist Tibetans roll their eyes at the gnomic Zennies, who smugly dismiss the striving Theravadans, who are enraged by the absolutist Vedantans, who make fun of the devotional theistics, who weep with joy and confusion and don’t actually care what the others say, because, like the famous “masts” of India, their engorged neural-circuits are sloshed on Divine love."

...

"So: why is all this worth the bother? There are many answers to this question. The first and most nondual is: I have no idea, nothing is worth the bother. That’s the absolutist view, which is extremely annoying and probably why no one talks to “neo-Advaita” extremists at parties.

A better answer is it matters for understanding the nature of mind. Some version of nonduality is the where all spiritual practice leads: meditation, prayer, koans, ecstatic dance – you name it. If you believe these people – and until there is a proper neuroscience that can address what is happening in the nondual brain, all we have to go on are first-person descriptions of experience – then by all reports the nondual operating space is fundamental to understanding who we are, how the mind works, and why we suffer."

[Deleted]

[Deleted]

non-duality.rupertspira.com/meet/2017/10/07/evening-meeting-at-new-york-open-center-october