I have been practising meditation for 20minutes twice a day since 1968. Your whole talk makes absolute sense to me, as I have often thought the same thing for a long time. The world does indeed need to hear this. Thank you so much.
It was lovely seeing you outside of your Oxford study Rupert. Thank you for expressing our essential nature in such beautiful words. I love listening about our shared being. It feels peaceful joyful and loving. Have a good retreat, I feel bless that you have showed up in my conscioussness.
Thank you Rupert, your compassion & love shine thorough your eyes as your words of wisdom eloquently and gently shine the truth.... I am grateful for the glimmers of understanding as a part of me ( the "big" me ) recognises and resonates and knows the truth of your words...... 🙏 A beautiful peaceful setting & a beautiful beautiful message. Thank you 💚 🌟💫 x
How I wish the teaching in this video, was understood (and pragmatized) by ALL sects of religion and made known to the whole world (even by politicians). We would have peace, love and happiness reigning.
Thank You Rupert Spira- you inspire an understanding so profound that it dissolves everything and leaves this holy alertness and clarity if what is- of I Am. I see the impermanence arise in a million different forms and ways, and yet this essential presence remains that is not me or you or any thing at all..- it just remains, like a secret that is whispered in every moment and the inquiry into who we are allows us to hear.
Truth, Love and Beauty is what I experienced listening to Rupert. If only all religious leaders could speak the way he speaks the world will be fully human and fully alive.
You were short, concise and easily understood. The background is delightful and further lent to your message. Please do that again. I loved it!! I also love your quotes and poems of spiritual and artistic personages. From Audrey in Utah, US
You are familiar with the power of dreams. They all seem very real until you wake up. You then realize it was just a dream but each time you can ALSO realize that in the dream your perspective was mistaken. You were not just a person in the dream within an outside world, you were the whole dream, all of it. It is all about That change of perspective. That is the truth that will set you free. Forever. In any dream you are not just a person, you are all That what appears, To which it appears and what it appears Within. You are an experienced dreamer so verify that. And hold on to that change of perspective because it is the path to you living your life consistent with the understanding Rupert is talking about. The bit you're working on. Try switching those perspectives during the day as often as possible and as long as possible. Discover your true nature gradually. Notice how it will make you feel better because this is your true nature. By the way, you have always lived your life like that from day one. Just look at toddlers. But growing up you got mesmerized by the dream. We all do until we awaken.
Yes, this is exactly what I long that (the sweat projections of).. my neighourship, few friends, that are muslims,christians, hindu, would comprehend..I pray the parents around the world to let the children to play and love freely whomever they want
Call off the search! My background is Christian evangelism but increasingly I felt uncomfortable with the sectarianism and exclusivity of its message. I had never heard of non-dualism but stumbled over you on TH-cam Rupert. You articulate what I had always intuited, and I am truly thankful for your witness to the Truth. How I wish everyone could hear this message. Godspeed your channel growth and sphere of influence. Thank you for your service. 🙏🕊
I think Jesus was very misunderstood too. He didnt allow himself to be crusified to change God's attitude toward us but our attitude toward God. To show that God reguires no blood, scapegoats or sacrifices, people do when they cant solve tensions within themselves and between eachother. So its a story of God that is perfectly loving, suffering with human, in human, as human. And its a story of a man who is so blind that he blinded by envious, competitious desires kills off that silent, humble voice amongs us that shows one desire that pulls us out of self centeredness, compaison, envy and competition. That desire is love. Anyway, I dont know your background. You might have a lot of allergy toward God talk for all I know. I actually took another road, from Ruperts kind advaita vedanta to christianity in a form I was describing it here. Got tired of trying get rid of myself. Found peace as child of God. Not gone, but small. Seperate from you, but not from the whole.
@@jessepasanen1422 We’re probably not that different Jesse. I haven’t abandoned Christianity, rather I feel driven to re-examine it from a non-dual perspective: I love the way Rupert helps me do this by alluding to the religious texts we’re all familiar with… ‘this is what is meant by….’ He does it here with Buddhism and Islam too: As he says, the non-dual understanding underpins the great religions and it’s our way home no matter which camp we start out from on the journey. 🙏🤍
Thank you Rupert for your heart felt expressions here on "The Unity of Being". Your offering is received as an invocation of what is essential for humanity and all beings. I cannot help but notice similarities in language between what you present here and Siddha Adi Da's teachings and Bright Divine Self Revelation. Are you aware of, or have you studied his life and work? There are also key critical distinctions too. Understanding these essential, root distinctions would serve the process of which you are invoking. Gratitude again Rupert. As One and Only, all inclusive.
Be the living example of the spoken word and trueness of it will radiate through Heaven and earth, from time immemorial until time yet to come. Kinda the tricky part. Get serious people. It's time.....
I find it odd and rather inconsistent to think that Consciousness doesn’t know itself clearly, that I awareness don’t know myself clearly, since it’s very nature is to know itself clearly. It doesn’t seem right, it seems the problem is with us awareness! There is a clear flaw in the explanation of why we don’t experience peace all the time.
Wow! *It is true that Artificial Intelligence already did that!* GPT3 is the name of the model and it showed that, amongst other things, all religions are pointing to the same truth. Have you experienced this yourself? It's time we work together to achieve a future of consciousness and love.
Even though our being is peace independently from our thoughts, thoughts can be a means of enhancing and qualifying peace in our body-mind experience. If we just ignore thoughts for the sake of being aware, we will know peace which doesn’t have connection with our thoughts. The only thought is that I want peace and in order to maintain it I have to keep having no communication with my thoughts, and it only happens when I cut the connection. But this is why this peace is powerless in the body-mind, which has been disregarded as non essential for peace. While being aware by means of thoughts that can be informed by the supra-rational God that wants and have a purpose for our body-mind experience, can enhance and empower its peace as it manifests itself as thoughts and meaningful action. This latter model of reality seems more in accord with the whole of experience, but it doesn’t mean that it is automatic. Rather it requires death to moral sin and autonomy, while the prior model of advaita/tantric doesn’t require those two things, but then makes peace not embrace the whole of reality as it manifests, unless the self cheats and assumes the latter view without realising it, which happens when the self thinks that there is purpose in this body-mind, since according to the view there is none apart from my illusory role I want to play for a while. This kind of peace then is weak in the body-mind however much it remains in the spirit. In christian theology is what can be placed in common grace, but special grace is that grace which adds to that which the other is lacking and completes the human being as a whole forever, because there is a resurrection of the body and not a disappearing into a self/nothing reality like when asleep.
Holding the last sentence, so do we all have ultimately same life purpose? Understanding that we are all one love? Where do we apply our own individual soul purposes in the non dual teachings? Thank you Rupert
"....at some point there is this simple recognition that our innermost being, that which is most essentially myself is without limits..." So keep on keepin' on."....at some point there is this simple recognition that our innermost being, that which is most essentially myself is without limits..." So keep on keepin' on.
Hello Rupert, Thank you for your sharing today. Though brief and likely not fully representative of your teaching I think your message can easily be assimilated by, and therefore reify, the humanitarian, secular moral, pantheist, collectivist mindset that undervalues and diminishes the nature and significance of the individual. ‘Reify’ is the perfect word in this context: ‘Reify: To regard or treat (an abstraction) as if it had concrete or material existence’. Short of internalization/recognition of your message I’d like to propose and ask: how else can it be heard other than through initially assimilating it to a mindset or view? What do we actually live and think, short of what you said “in the ultimate analysis (where) there are no separate independently existing people or things, there is simply one whole, one reality, or Being which appears from our localized and limited perspectives as a multiplicity of objects and selves but which is reality simple, whole, perfect, complete, without any division, without any separation” ? I would say we live inside views that we don’t fully know. I am not wanting to pretend a conclusion or understanding of your intention here but your account quoted above sounds decidedly pantheistic - my point being that this “ultimate analysis” is likely to be heard by some as pantheistic (‘the doctrine or belief that God is the universe and its phenomena (taken or conceived of as a whole) or the doctrine that regards the universe as a manifestation of God’), and in that (reductive) regard is counter to wakefulness. In other words if individuals inevitably hear what you are saying from their form of consciousness which makes up their individuality as well as their word view or/or ideology, might we point out this assimilation, and thereby bring attention to what needs to be inquired into? I think pointing out this assimilation, and the viewpoints that in part constitute our sense of Being and individuality, is a way of honouring and paying attention to who and ‘where’, so to speak, individuals are. The way we “get lost in our experience” is how we already are asleep in a particular form of consciousness which is a way of trying to be (the) unconditioned as this one; decipherment/seeing of the form from within being it in everyday life and in dialogue with other individuals is integral and inseparable from releasement. The way the humanitarian, secular moral, pantheist, collectivist attitude inherently disparages and disapproves of the individual (in their uniqueness, eccentricity, privateness, interiority) is well drawn out by Aurel Kolnai in his essay ‘The Humanitarian Versus the Religious Attitude’ (1944), found in ‘Politics, Values, and National Socialism’. (I haven’t thought it out but Kolnai’s views in this essay may be importantly refined or qualified in light of non-dual understanding/insight into religious and spiritual life). The following paragraph from Kolnai’s essay beautifully expresses a reciprocal relation between man and the Divine - and indicates a direct challenge to St. Augustine’s answer - “Love and do what ever you want” (we can guess how this may sound to those steeped in the modern individualistic ethos) - to the moral and ethical implications of deeper understanding. Kolnai writes: “Thus, in religion, the incommensurableness between man and the cosmic forces which surround and condition him without, apparently, being affected by his actions in any but an infinitesimal sense, is at the same time reaffirmed and - tentatively, at least - healed: man is no longer simply a hopeless exile lost in the vastness of things extra-human of which he is doomed to occupy a tiny corner; by dint of his proper contact with the Divine, to which cosmic reality is subject or in which it is centered, he comes to fill a rightful place, to assume a positional value as it were in the Universe (whatever his concrete conception of the latter). Finally, to the Divine - though it’s personal nature be represented in a vague and uncertain fashion only - is attributed a ‘claim’ on man; in other words, man’s cognition of the Divine inherently entails obligations on his part. These are always closely interrelated, but never purely and simply identical, with whatever he experiences as moral obligations. The duties and functions of men (in society, or under the eyes of society) thus appear to be specifically incorporated in the ultimate principles of Being as such. I have, naturally, employed a more or less modern and technical language (though, as best I could, a ‘neutral’ one), rather unlike the terms in which actual religious consciousness is wont to express itself; yet it is in some such way, I think, that the main purport of that consciousness may be conceptually grasped.”
And so, on World Religion Day, where does this beautiful non-dual and unifying understanding leave the future of human religion as we know it? Because not only do the various religions have their own particular take on 'truth' but, of course, at the same time, they both disagree with each other and also show no sign whatsoever of each giving up the proclamation of their own unique scriptures and dogmas, which effectively, are often in opposition to each other. How ironic then, that the very institutions who's aim is presumably to bring people together, actually play such a divisive role in human affairs overall.
All we need to know to get in touch with the happiness that is our own nature In the Christian tradition the same message take the form “Love God thy Lord with all your soul and and strength and love others as Yourself“
I guess this comment would neither encourage nor discourage you because,as you said the true nature of our being is peace or happiness ,nevertheless I wish to appreciate the wisdom carried in your message.
A lovely message in a lovely setting. However I will have to pass on the assertion that all the 'great' religious and spiritual traditions of the last 3000 years share in essence the same nondual understanding. Seems like wishful thinking to me, unless you do some very careful cherry picking.
For the word that became flesh and dwelt among Us, in whom the father is well please, is Jesus the Christ, the savior of the world, the only name under heaven in which a man might be saved, and that name is Jesus the Christ, the savior of the world, the bishop and overseer of our souls, IN the Gospel of John chapter 14 verses 1 through 6;-_verse 1- let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in GOD, believe also in me. verse 2 in my father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you, I go to prepare a place for you, verse -3- and if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also. verse -4- and whether I go ye know, and the way ye know. _-5- Thomas Smith unto him, Lord, We know not Whither thou goest; And How can we know the way?_-6- Jesus saith unto him, I am the way. The truth, And the life, No man cometh unto The Father, but by me. _- May the GOD an father of the Lord Jesus Christ save us all, AND Jesus said this on the cross, father forgive them, for they know not what they do, And GOD THE FATHER hes not willing that any should Parish, People of the Earth, repent and believe the good news, for the kingdom of GOD is at hand in 2022, receive the Lord Jesus Christ and be Born Again, And join the family of GOD today, Revelations 3; 20_- Behold I stand at the door and knock: If any man hear my voice, And open the door, I will come in to him, And will sup with him, And he with me. There's your invitation people of the world, And remember GOD is the same yesterday today and forever, And our GOD'S mercy endures forever, Sincerely, John D. Kavanaugh jr.
Hola ¡ 7:14 però aquest estat d'ignorancia qui hi está sinó el nostre ser esencial que som ? els nostres pensaments i sentiments,no es que siguis essencials, però qui els té ? en pau i no pau al mateix temps encara que la pau permanent sigui el estat original natural,és sempre el mateix ésser perquè s'implica en cada acció pensament sentiment i demés ,, 14:43 i no coherent també
@Rupert Spira - Although you will likely agree that labels are inadequate for many purposes, would you accept the contention that you are panentheistic? If not, what would be your rejection of that? Thanking you in advance if you answer this. It is in response to @9:49 of the video.
@@goyo3021 I don't think he addresses it directly. Then again, I'm the type that follows the tacit and reads between the lines so I can imagine his response. Still, it'd be nice to hear it from him.
Hi Seanus32, I think there are pantheistic elements to Rupert’s view, but welcome his clarification on this as well, it may be a difference he doesn’t lay out between an ultimate level account framed and maybe heard from a conventional level. I thought you may find some of the points and questions I raise to Rupert of interest: Hello Rupert, Thank you for your sharing today. Though brief and likely not fully representative of your teaching I think your message can easily be assimilated by, and therefore reify, the humanitarian, secular moral, pantheist, collectivist mindset that undervalues and diminishes the nature and significance of the individual. ‘Reify’ is the perfect word in this context: ‘Reify: To regard or treat (an abstraction) as if it had concrete or material existence’. Short of internalization/recognition of your message I’d like to propose and ask: how else can it be heard other than through initially assimilating it to a mindset or view? What do we actually live and think, short of what you said “in the ultimate analysis (where) there are no separate independently existing people or things, there is simply one whole, one reality, or Being which appears from our localized and limited perspectives as a multiplicity of objects and selves but which is reality simple, whole, perfect, complete, without any division, without any separation” ? I would say we live inside views that we don’t fully know. I am not wanting to pretend a conclusion or understanding of your intention here but your account quoted above sounds decidedly pantheistic - my point being that this “ultimate analysis” is likely to be heard by some as pantheistic (‘the doctrine or belief that God is the universe and its phenomena (taken or conceived of as a whole) or the doctrine that regards the universe as a manifestation of God’), and in that (reductive) regard is counter to wakefulness. In other words if individuals inevitably hear what you are saying from their form of consciousness which makes up their individuality as well as their word view or/or ideology, might we point out this assimilation, and thereby bring attention to what needs to be inquired into? I think pointing out this assimilation, and the viewpoints that in part constitute our sense of Being and individuality, is a way of honouring and paying attention to who and ‘where’, so to speak, individuals are. The way we “get lost in our experience” is how we already are asleep in a particular form of consciousness which is a way of trying to be (the) unconditioned as this one; decipherment/seeing of the form from within being it in everyday life and in dialogue with other individuals is integral and inseparable from releasement. The way the humanitarian, secular moral, pantheist, collectivist attitude inherently disparages and disapproves of the individual (in their uniqueness, eccentricity, privateness, interiority) is well drawn out by Aurel Kolnai in his essay ‘The Humanitarian Versus the Religious Attitude’ (1944), found in ‘Politics, Values, and National Socialism’. (I haven’t thought it out but Kolnai’s views in this essay may be importantly refined or qualified in light of non-dual understanding/insight into religious and spiritual life). The following paragraph from Kolnai’s essay beautifully expresses a reciprocal relation between man and the Divine - and indicates a direct challenge to St. Augustine’s answer - “Love and do what ever you want” (we can guess how this may sound to those steeped in the modern individualistic ethos) - to the moral and ethical implications of deeper understanding. Kolnai writes: “Thus, in religion, the incommensurableness between man and the cosmic forces which surround and condition him without, apparently, being affected by his actions in any but an infinitesimal sense, is at the same time reaffirmed and - tentatively, at least - healed: man is no longer simply a hopeless exile lost in the vastness of things extra-human of which he is doomed to occupy a tiny corner; by dint of his proper contact with the Divine, to which cosmic reality is subject or in which it is centered, he comes to fill a rightful place, to assume a positional value as it were in the Universe (whatever his concrete conception of the latter). Finally, to the Divine - though it’s personal nature be represented in a vague and uncertain fashion only - is attributed a ‘claim’ on man; in other words, man’s cognition of the Divine inherently entails obligations on his part. These are always closely interrelated, but never purely and simply identical, with whatever he experiences as moral obligations. The duties and functions of men (in society, or under the eyes of society) thus appear to be specifically incorporated in the ultimate principles of Being as such. I have, naturally, employed a more or less modern and technical language (though, as best I could, a ‘neutral’ one), rather unlike the terms in which actual religious consciousness is wont to express itself; yet it is in some such way, I think, that the main purport of that consciousness may be conceptually grasped.”
@@Seanus32 Hi Seanus32, ( I misread your initial question to Rupert, misread panentheism as pantheism. Oh well : ) has been thought provoking to think out these matters). I think there is a meaningful difference between the two, especially as regards further discernment of the terms at issue that are attempting to be addressed and reconciled. The terms and the effort at explanation are central to metaphysics, or put more personally, the effort to embody reason in oneself. Taking the following definition: ‘Panentheism is a blending of theism (belief in a God) and pantheism (all is God). It specifically teaches that God is greater than the universe and that the universe exists within God. It therefore stands distinct from pantheism (which believes God is all) as well as theism (which teaches God is distinct from His creation)’. Panentheism seems to attempt incorporation of the Unconditioned, (the Absolute, Being) with space and time/change. Whereas pantheism attempts identification, equating of, the Unconditioned with the world of space and time. With panentheism teaching that the universe exists within God - it’s a strange thing to think out what it means for the known to be ‘contained in’ God - the Unconditioned, transcendent, formless nature of the Absolute seems to be maintained while explaining how everything is related to it: all exists ‘within’ the Unconditioned. Reality is spacialized, and the Divine is the inconceivable container. (I may be getting that wrong but that’s how it seems). Is pantheism’s vision of the Unconditioned similar or the same as substance? We don’t see God, we see qualities, is God underlying qualities or existing unbroken as the underlying substance of all perceived things? I need to think more on this. (Many of these sorts of questions, the history and inner logic of the terms at issue, if it’s of interest to you to explore further, can be found in the classic study ‘The Great Chain of Being’ by Arthur Lovejoy.) (To speak of ‘terms at issue’ will sound abstract to some, but they are always at issue. A fellow said to me the other day ‘Maybe you can help me out of how I’m getting overwhelmed. I’m trying to do it all but I can’t”. A young woman starting a nutritional counseling business described “feelings of self doubt”, “imposture syndrome”, wanting her knowledge to be complete, thorough, in the absence of which she feels inadequate. A woman talking about troubled marriage and family relationships said “All I see is inadequacy, insufficiency, around me”).
Thank you Rupert for emanating the light upon the truth of Being.
Rupert Spira Thank God Thank You. Rupert Spira
Thank You!
Thank you
Dear Rupert, I embrace you with my heart. Thank you for your mission.
Thank you. Beautiful 🕊
I think I'll just watch this over and over again 🙏❤️🙏
Me too. It’s all here and there’s loads to unpack in each sentence. 🙌
I have been practising meditation for 20minutes twice a day since 1968. Your whole talk makes absolute sense to me, as I have often thought the same thing for a long time. The world does indeed need to hear this. Thank you so much.
Merci Rupert. J
Rupert,thank you for sharing.
🙏
The best Sunday sermon I have ever heard.
I agree !
Thank you☀️
It was lovely seeing you outside of your Oxford study Rupert. Thank you for expressing our essential nature in such beautiful words. I love listening about our shared being. It feels peaceful joyful and loving. Have a good retreat, I feel bless that you have showed up in my conscioussness.
Thank you Rupert, your compassion & love shine thorough your eyes as your words of wisdom eloquently and gently shine the truth....
I am grateful for the glimmers of understanding as a part of me ( the "big" me ) recognises and resonates and knows the truth of your words...... 🙏
A beautiful peaceful setting & a beautiful beautiful message. Thank you 💚 🌟💫 x
Thank You 🙏
Thank you Rupert, our world needs to hear this, I pray daily all discover feel the truth of your words. God bless you !
Thanks Rupert!
Just the fact of recording this video for us already speaks of Love, which is Everything...
Thank you Rupert for making plain how being is not the same as the content of experience. Thank you for the gift of your clarity.
How I wish the teaching in this video, was understood (and pragmatized) by ALL sects of religion and made known to the whole world (even by politicians). We would have peace, love and happiness reigning.
Such clarity. Thank you
Thank You Rupert Spira- you inspire an understanding so profound that it dissolves everything and leaves this holy alertness and clarity if what is- of I Am. I see the impermanence arise in a million different forms and ways, and yet this essential presence remains that is not me or you or any thing at all..- it just remains, like a secret that is whispered in every moment and the inquiry into who we are allows us to hear.
Rupert, you made my day💥thank you. Such a clear understanding that you have. I’ve learned so much from you.
Thank you Rupert. 🙏
So very, very, beautiful! Thank You, Rupert!
Much love to you, my beautiful teacher 💫🙏🏻💫
You speak to my soul the words of spirit and they resonate and heal and love becomes clear and present 💕
Truth, Love and Beauty is what I experienced listening to Rupert. If only all religious leaders could speak the way he speaks the world will be fully human and fully alive.
Thank you Rupert I tink The world need this advice please do this again thank you bless you
Thank you for this message Rupert. God bless.
thankyou! bless you!
Thanks for taking the time to deliver this succinct message, Rupert.
Amazing Rupert, you express it all so well. Thank you for voicing this.
You are a truly wonderful soul...Thank you for all the Truth you teach us. I am ever grateful 🙏
You were short, concise and easily understood. The background is delightful and further lent to your message. Please do that again. I loved it!! I also love your quotes and poems of spiritual and artistic personages.
From Audrey in Utah, US
Thank you so very much 💕💖
Listening to you is listening to myself.
It is blissful when I find myself in others, so much beauty
ah! so awareness is your essential being! and essential being is behind all experience..nice!
Thank you, Rupert for your dedication to expression of Being and sharing with all with your eloquent use of language and depth of wisdom 🦋❤️🙏🏻
Such a beautiful description. Thankyou 🥰
💞🙏🌺 n extra Thank You for taking this time to Share, being on location and so buisy as you are Rupert❣(and team)🌺🙏🙏🙏😇😇😇 God Bless
Thank you Rupert and Neil. Rima
Thank you, Rima!
@@neil-RSteam You are bringing true Happiness, Love and Peace in the Universe. 🙏, Rima
❤🙏"Wachtet auf, ruft uns die Stimme." -Bach Cantata BWV 140 "Wake up, the voice is calling us."
To live a life that is consistent with that understanding. That’s the bit I’m working on :)
You are familiar with the power of dreams. They all seem very real until you wake up. You then realize it was just a dream but each time you can ALSO realize that in the dream your perspective was mistaken. You were not just a person in the dream within an outside world, you were the whole dream, all of it.
It is all about That change of perspective.
That is the truth that will set you free.
Forever.
In any dream you are not just a person, you are all That what appears, To which it appears and what it appears Within.
You are an experienced dreamer so verify that.
And hold on to that change of perspective because it is the path to you living your life consistent with the understanding Rupert is talking about. The bit you're working on.
Try switching those perspectives during the day as often as possible and as long as possible.
Discover your true nature gradually.
Notice how it will make you feel better because this is your true nature.
By the way, you have always lived your life like that from day one.
Just look at toddlers.
But growing up you got mesmerized by the dream.
We all do until we awaken.
thank you rupert thank thank you
Wonderful sharing, bless you for sharing this beautiful message on this special day. I trust the retreat is a beautiful one too🙏
In some ways so simple yet difficult to live. Thank you for your always consistent guidance on this beautiful journey called life 💜
Muchísimas gracias!!! Completísimo y súper claro!!
amen
Yes, this is exactly what I long that (the sweat projections of).. my neighourship, few friends, that are muslims,christians, hindu, would comprehend..I pray the parents around the world to let the children to play and love freely whomever they want
right , ecumenism is necessary urgently .
One universal process! Very nice talk!!!
Another wonderfully rich presentation, Rupert. Thank you so much! 🙏🧡
This goes straight to the heart.
Call off the search! My background is Christian evangelism but increasingly I felt uncomfortable with the sectarianism and exclusivity of its message. I had never heard of non-dualism but stumbled over you on TH-cam Rupert. You articulate what I had always intuited, and I am truly thankful for your witness to the Truth. How I wish everyone could hear this message. Godspeed your channel growth and sphere of influence. Thank you for your service. 🙏🕊
I think Jesus was very misunderstood too. He didnt allow himself to be crusified to change God's attitude toward us but our attitude toward God. To show that God reguires no blood, scapegoats or sacrifices, people do when they cant solve tensions within themselves and between eachother. So its a story of God that is perfectly loving, suffering with human, in human, as human. And its a story of a man who is so blind that he blinded by envious, competitious desires kills off that silent, humble voice amongs us that shows one desire that pulls us out of self centeredness, compaison, envy and competition. That desire is love.
Anyway, I dont know your background. You might have a lot of allergy toward God talk for all I know. I actually took another road, from Ruperts kind advaita vedanta to christianity in a form I was describing it here. Got tired of trying get rid of myself. Found peace as child of God. Not gone, but small. Seperate from you, but not from the whole.
@@jessepasanen1422 We’re probably not that different Jesse. I haven’t abandoned Christianity, rather I feel driven to re-examine it from a non-dual perspective: I love the way Rupert helps me do this by alluding to the religious texts we’re all familiar with… ‘this is what is meant by….’ He does it here with Buddhism and Islam too: As he says, the non-dual understanding underpins the great religions and it’s our way home no matter which camp we start out from on the journey. 🙏🤍
luke 17 : 20-21
Thank you Rupert, well said and I love you.
Thank you 🙏✨
Awesome master in this preset era...
Thank you Rupert!...I so love you!...thanks to your team too!...blessings!
Rupert, Absolutely Beautiful 🙏❤️
Well done Rupert you got them all in the fold.
Listening to your words make as so much sense, thank you 🙏
Thank you so much Rupert.
Beautifully said.Thanks.
Thank you Rupert for your heart felt expressions here on "The Unity of Being". Your offering is received as an invocation of what is essential for humanity and all beings. I cannot help but notice similarities in language between what you present here and Siddha Adi Da's teachings and Bright Divine Self Revelation.
Are you aware of, or have you studied his life and work? There are also key critical distinctions too. Understanding these essential, root distinctions would serve the process of which you are invoking. Gratitude again Rupert. As One and Only, all inclusive.
May your understanding go even deeper bro never stop learning more then others
Simply love and beauty
Much thanks Rupert :) 💜
💚💚💚
Be the living example of the spoken word and trueness of it will radiate through Heaven and earth, from time immemorial until time yet to come. Kinda the tricky part. Get serious people. It's time.....
🌳💞🗿🙏I AM🌏🌎🌍 grateful that humanity is choosing conscious evolution
Thanks Rupert. How clear you are.
I find it odd and rather inconsistent to think that Consciousness doesn’t know itself clearly, that I awareness don’t know myself clearly, since it’s very nature is to know itself clearly. It doesn’t seem right, it seems the problem is with us awareness! There is a clear flaw in the explanation of why we don’t experience peace all the time.
God Bless
Wow! *It is true that Artificial Intelligence already did that!* GPT3 is the name of the model and it showed that, amongst other things, all religions are pointing to the same truth. Have you experienced this yourself? It's time we work together to achieve a future of consciousness and love.
Yes!!!
@BornUnknown Yess definitely!!
Thanks for this😊🙏
@@RVEEATOR no problem:) would love to help people with my channel / insta in the future!😁
Deep love and understanding.
All you need is love
Even though our being is peace independently from our thoughts, thoughts can be a means of enhancing and qualifying peace in our body-mind experience. If we just ignore thoughts for the sake of being aware, we will know peace which doesn’t have connection with our thoughts. The only thought is that I want peace and in order to maintain it I have to keep having no communication with my thoughts, and it only happens when I cut the connection. But this is why this peace is powerless in the body-mind, which has been disregarded as non essential for peace. While being aware by means of thoughts that can be informed by the supra-rational God that wants and have a purpose for our body-mind experience, can enhance and empower its peace as it manifests itself as thoughts and meaningful action. This latter model of reality seems more in accord with the whole of experience, but it doesn’t mean that it is automatic. Rather it requires death to moral sin and autonomy, while the prior model of advaita/tantric doesn’t require those two things, but then makes peace not embrace the whole of reality as it manifests, unless the self cheats and assumes the latter view without realising it, which happens when the self thinks that there is purpose in this body-mind, since according to the view there is none apart from my illusory role I want to play for a while. This kind of peace then is weak in the body-mind however much it remains in the spirit. In christian theology is what can be placed in common grace, but special grace is that grace which adds to that which the other is lacking and completes the human being as a whole forever, because there is a resurrection of the body and not a disappearing into a self/nothing reality like when asleep.
✨Perfect✨
🙏🏼🌸🙏🏼
Holding the last sentence, so do we all have ultimately same life purpose? Understanding that we are all one love? Where do we apply our own individual soul purposes in the non dual teachings? Thank you Rupert
Yes, of course, it's essential to reach for a link of Advaita Vedanta to Islam.
I love you Rupert. Ommmm
💞💞💞
🌿
"....at some point there is this simple recognition that our innermost being, that which is most essentially myself is without limits..." So keep on keepin' on."....at some point there is this simple recognition that our innermost being, that which is most essentially myself is without limits..." So keep on keepin' on.
Hello Rupert,
Thank you for your sharing today. Though brief and likely not fully representative of your teaching I think your message can easily be assimilated by, and therefore reify, the humanitarian, secular moral, pantheist, collectivist mindset that undervalues and diminishes the nature and significance of the individual.
‘Reify’ is the perfect word in this context: ‘Reify: To regard or treat (an abstraction) as if it had concrete or material existence’. Short of internalization/recognition of your message I’d like to propose and ask: how else can it be heard other than through initially assimilating it to a mindset or view? What do we actually live and think, short of what you said “in the ultimate analysis (where) there are no separate independently existing people or things, there is simply one whole, one reality, or Being which appears from our localized and limited perspectives as a multiplicity of objects and selves but which is reality simple, whole, perfect, complete, without any division, without any separation” ? I would say we live inside views that we don’t fully know.
I am not wanting to pretend a conclusion or understanding of your intention here but your account quoted above sounds decidedly pantheistic - my point being that this “ultimate analysis” is likely to be heard by some as pantheistic (‘the doctrine or belief that God is the universe and its phenomena (taken or conceived of as a whole) or the doctrine that regards the universe as a manifestation of God’), and in that (reductive) regard is counter to wakefulness. In other words if individuals inevitably hear what you are saying from their form of consciousness which makes up their individuality as well as their word view or/or ideology, might we point out this assimilation, and thereby bring attention to what needs to be inquired into? I think pointing out this assimilation, and the viewpoints that in part constitute our sense of Being and individuality, is a way of honouring and paying attention to who and ‘where’, so to speak, individuals are.
The way we “get lost in our experience” is how we already are asleep in a particular form of consciousness which is a way of trying to be (the) unconditioned as this one; decipherment/seeing of the form from within being it in everyday life and in dialogue with other individuals is integral and inseparable from releasement.
The way the humanitarian, secular moral, pantheist, collectivist attitude inherently disparages and disapproves of the individual (in their uniqueness, eccentricity, privateness, interiority) is well drawn out by Aurel Kolnai in his essay ‘The Humanitarian Versus the Religious Attitude’ (1944), found in ‘Politics, Values, and National Socialism’. (I haven’t thought it out but Kolnai’s views in this essay may be importantly refined or qualified in light of non-dual understanding/insight into religious and spiritual life). The following paragraph from Kolnai’s essay beautifully expresses a reciprocal relation between man and the Divine - and indicates a direct challenge to St. Augustine’s answer - “Love and do what ever you want” (we can guess how this may sound to those steeped in the modern individualistic ethos) - to the moral and ethical implications of deeper understanding.
Kolnai writes: “Thus, in religion, the incommensurableness between man and the cosmic forces which surround and condition him without, apparently, being affected by his actions in any but an infinitesimal sense, is at the same time reaffirmed and - tentatively, at least - healed: man is no longer simply a hopeless exile lost in the vastness of things extra-human of which he is doomed to occupy a tiny corner; by dint of his proper contact with the Divine, to which cosmic reality is subject or in which it is centered, he comes to fill a rightful place, to assume a positional value as it were in the Universe (whatever his concrete conception of the latter). Finally, to the Divine - though it’s personal nature be represented in a vague and uncertain fashion only - is attributed a ‘claim’ on man; in other words, man’s cognition of the Divine inherently entails obligations on his part. These are always closely interrelated, but never purely and simply identical, with whatever he experiences as moral obligations. The duties and functions of men (in society, or under the eyes of society) thus appear to be specifically incorporated in the ultimate principles of Being as such. I have, naturally, employed a more or less modern and technical language (though, as best I could, a ‘neutral’ one), rather unlike the terms in which actual religious consciousness is wont to express itself; yet it is in some such way, I think, that the main purport of that consciousness may be conceptually grasped.”
7:00 wow.
9:55 rumi👍🏻👍🏻
when you're hungry you're not very peaceful or happy , so peace and happiness are subjective feelings controlled by conditional variables
And so, on World Religion Day, where does this beautiful non-dual and unifying understanding leave the future of human religion as we know it? Because not only do the various religions have their own particular take on 'truth' but, of course, at the same time, they both disagree with each other and also show no sign whatsoever of each giving up the proclamation of their own unique scriptures and dogmas, which effectively, are often in opposition to each other. How ironic then, that the very institutions who's aim is presumably to bring people together, actually play such a divisive role in human affairs overall.
All we need to know to get in touch with the happiness that is our own nature In the Christian tradition the same message take the form “Love God thy Lord with all your soul and and strength and love others as Yourself“
You're talking about duality. Rupert is talking about nonduality.
That is if you understand that you are god .......
❤️❤️❤️❤️
💖💖💖💖💖💖💖💖
🙏
🙏💕
🌺💙🙏
I guess this comment would neither encourage nor discourage you because,as you said the true nature of our being is peace or happiness ,nevertheless I wish to appreciate the wisdom carried in your message.
💟🙏
A lovely message in a lovely setting. However I will have to pass on the assertion that all the 'great' religious and spiritual traditions of the last 3000 years share in essence the same nondual understanding. Seems like wishful thinking to me, unless you do some very careful cherry picking.
The institutions dont want to lose customers when one realizes the hidden truth . Rupert is being optimistic.
W
For the word that became flesh and dwelt among Us, in whom the father is well please, is Jesus the Christ, the savior of the world, the only name under heaven in which a man might be saved, and that name is Jesus the Christ, the savior of the world, the bishop and overseer of our souls, IN the Gospel of John chapter 14 verses 1 through 6;-_verse 1- let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in GOD, believe also in me. verse 2 in my father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you, I go to prepare a place for you, verse -3- and if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also. verse -4- and whether I go ye know, and the way ye know. _-5- Thomas Smith unto him, Lord, We know not Whither thou goest; And How can we know the way?_-6- Jesus saith unto him, I am the way. The truth, And the life, No man cometh unto The Father, but by me. _- May the GOD an father of the Lord Jesus Christ save us all, AND Jesus said this on the cross, father forgive them, for they know not what they do, And GOD THE FATHER hes not willing that any should Parish, People of the Earth, repent and believe the good news, for the kingdom of GOD is at hand in 2022, receive the Lord Jesus Christ and be Born Again, And join the family of GOD today, Revelations 3; 20_- Behold I stand at the door and knock: If any man hear my voice, And open the door, I will come in to him, And will sup with him, And he with me. There's your invitation people of the world, And remember GOD is the same yesterday today and forever, And our GOD'S mercy endures forever, Sincerely, John D. Kavanaugh jr.
Hola ¡ 7:14 però aquest estat d'ignorancia qui hi está sinó el nostre ser esencial que som ? els nostres pensaments i sentiments,no es que siguis essencials, però qui els té ? en pau i no pau al mateix temps encara que la pau permanent sigui el estat original natural,és sempre el mateix ésser perquè s'implica en cada acció pensament sentiment i demés ,, 14:43 i no coherent també
@Rupert Spira - Although you will likely agree that labels are inadequate for many purposes, would you accept the contention that you are panentheistic? If not, what would be your rejection of that? Thanking you in advance if you answer this. It is in response to @9:49 of the video.
I hope Rupert clarifies this for you. However there are several TH-cam videos of his that address this. Best of luck.
@@goyo3021 I don't think he addresses it directly. Then again, I'm the type that follows the tacit and reads between the lines so I can imagine his response. Still, it'd be nice to hear it from him.
Hi Seanus32, I think there are pantheistic elements to Rupert’s view, but welcome his clarification on this as well, it may be a difference he doesn’t lay out between an ultimate level account framed and maybe heard from a conventional level. I thought you may find some of the points and questions I raise to Rupert of interest:
Hello Rupert,
Thank you for your sharing today. Though brief and likely not fully representative of your teaching I think your message can easily be assimilated by, and therefore reify, the humanitarian, secular moral, pantheist, collectivist mindset that undervalues and diminishes the nature and significance of the individual.
‘Reify’ is the perfect word in this context: ‘Reify: To regard or treat (an abstraction) as if it had concrete or material existence’. Short of internalization/recognition of your message I’d like to propose and ask: how else can it be heard other than through initially assimilating it to a mindset or view? What do we actually live and think, short of what you said “in the ultimate analysis (where) there are no separate independently existing people or things, there is simply one whole, one reality, or Being which appears from our localized and limited perspectives as a multiplicity of objects and selves but which is reality simple, whole, perfect, complete, without any division, without any separation” ? I would say we live inside views that we don’t fully know.
I am not wanting to pretend a conclusion or understanding of your intention here but your account quoted above sounds decidedly pantheistic - my point being that this “ultimate analysis” is likely to be heard by some as pantheistic (‘the doctrine or belief that God is the universe and its phenomena (taken or conceived of as a whole) or the doctrine that regards the universe as a manifestation of God’), and in that (reductive) regard is counter to wakefulness. In other words if individuals inevitably hear what you are saying from their form of consciousness which makes up their individuality as well as their word view or/or ideology, might we point out this assimilation, and thereby bring attention to what needs to be inquired into? I think pointing out this assimilation, and the viewpoints that in part constitute our sense of Being and individuality, is a way of honouring and paying attention to who and ‘where’, so to speak, individuals are.
The way we “get lost in our experience” is how we already are asleep in a particular form of consciousness which is a way of trying to be (the) unconditioned as this one; decipherment/seeing of the form from within being it in everyday life and in dialogue with other individuals is integral and inseparable from releasement.
The way the humanitarian, secular moral, pantheist, collectivist attitude inherently disparages and disapproves of the individual (in their uniqueness, eccentricity, privateness, interiority) is well drawn out by Aurel Kolnai in his essay ‘The Humanitarian Versus the Religious Attitude’ (1944), found in ‘Politics, Values, and National Socialism’. (I haven’t thought it out but Kolnai’s views in this essay may be importantly refined or qualified in light of non-dual understanding/insight into religious and spiritual life). The following paragraph from Kolnai’s essay beautifully expresses a reciprocal relation between man and the Divine - and indicates a direct challenge to St. Augustine’s answer - “Love and do what ever you want” (we can guess how this may sound to those steeped in the modern individualistic ethos) - to the moral and ethical implications of deeper understanding.
Kolnai writes: “Thus, in religion, the incommensurableness between man and the cosmic forces which surround and condition him without, apparently, being affected by his actions in any but an infinitesimal sense, is at the same time reaffirmed and - tentatively, at least - healed: man is no longer simply a hopeless exile lost in the vastness of things extra-human of which he is doomed to occupy a tiny corner; by dint of his proper contact with the Divine, to which cosmic reality is subject or in which it is centered, he comes to fill a rightful place, to assume a positional value as it were in the Universe (whatever his concrete conception of the latter). Finally, to the Divine - though it’s personal nature be represented in a vague and uncertain fashion only - is attributed a ‘claim’ on man; in other words, man’s cognition of the Divine inherently entails obligations on his part. These are always closely interrelated, but never purely and simply identical, with whatever he experiences as moral obligations. The duties and functions of men (in society, or under the eyes of society) thus appear to be specifically incorporated in the ultimate principles of Being as such. I have, naturally, employed a more or less modern and technical language (though, as best I could, a ‘neutral’ one), rather unlike the terms in which actual religious consciousness is wont to express itself; yet it is in some such way, I think, that the main purport of that consciousness may be conceptually grasped.”
@@inquiry21 Wow, lengthy but useful :) I'm curious, do you see a meaningful difference between pantheism and panentheism?
@@Seanus32 Hi Seanus32, ( I misread your initial question to Rupert, misread panentheism as pantheism. Oh well : ) has been thought provoking to think out these matters). I think there is a meaningful difference between the two, especially as regards further discernment of the terms at issue that are attempting to be addressed and reconciled. The terms and the effort at explanation are central to metaphysics, or put more personally, the effort to embody reason in oneself.
Taking the following definition: ‘Panentheism is a blending of theism (belief in a God) and pantheism (all is God). It specifically teaches that God is greater than the universe and that the universe exists within God. It therefore stands distinct from pantheism (which believes God is all) as well as theism (which teaches God is distinct from His creation)’. Panentheism seems to attempt incorporation of the Unconditioned, (the Absolute, Being) with space and time/change. Whereas pantheism attempts identification, equating of, the Unconditioned with the world of space and time. With panentheism teaching that the universe exists within God - it’s a strange thing to think out what it means for the known to be ‘contained in’ God - the Unconditioned, transcendent, formless nature of the Absolute seems to be maintained while explaining how everything is related to it: all exists ‘within’ the Unconditioned. Reality is spacialized, and the Divine is the inconceivable container. (I may be getting that wrong but that’s how it seems).
Is pantheism’s vision of the Unconditioned similar or the same as substance? We don’t see God, we see qualities, is God underlying qualities or existing unbroken as the underlying substance of all perceived things? I need to think more on this. (Many of these sorts of questions, the history and inner logic of the terms at issue, if it’s of interest to you to explore further, can be found in the classic study ‘The Great Chain of Being’ by Arthur Lovejoy.)
(To speak of ‘terms at issue’ will sound abstract to some, but they are always at issue. A fellow said to me the other day ‘Maybe you can help me out of how I’m getting overwhelmed. I’m trying to do it all but I can’t”. A young woman starting a nutritional counseling business described “feelings of self doubt”, “imposture syndrome”, wanting her knowledge to be complete, thorough, in the absence of which she feels inadequate. A woman talking about troubled marriage and family relationships said “All I see is inadequacy, insufficiency, around me”).