When the Search Brings Itself to an End

"What is it that’s driving the attention-intention bus – for us as individuals, for animals, for the cosmos? Is there a way to drive it more efficiently? My separate self wants to make this process faster. Rupert says: ‘We’re drawn to give attention to the world for different reasons. First, practical reasons – you’re hungry, you go to the store. Caring for someone, doing your work, creativity – all require attention. Then there’s another source: a deep existential search, this core feeling that something is missing. This sense of lack drives most of our repetitive thinking – it’s a smokescreen that prevents us from feeling the discomfort of existential lack. We escape into thinking about past and future. That’s the only problematic use of attention – when it’s in service of this sense of lack, the core of the ego. The more you derive your identity solely from being and not from experience, the less of this type of thinking there is. You have to keep searching until your understanding brings the search to an end. As Bayazid Bastami said, “What we speak of here cannot be found by seeking, but only seekers find it.” The search must be undermined through understanding, not discipline.’"

"The nature of aware being feels very open and neutral – what’s at the top of the mountain. But divine intelligence feels active, even preferential towards outcomes aligned with love and understanding. Is divine intelligence one step down from the top, or is it at the top but just appears differently to my mind? Rupert says: ‘Using your definitions, divine intelligence would be the expression of aware being in the finite mind – the highest expression of the qualities that are the nature of infinite being. It would be a finite mind completely purified of the ego, functioning only in service of love and understanding. Whereas most minds function at times on behalf of love and understanding and at times on behalf of the separate self. So divine intelligence is the pure expression of love and understanding in the relative world – not a response to aware being but a creative expression of it. From the point of view of an egoic mind, divine intelligence feels like an expansion of its normally narrow point of view. But from the point of view of consciousness, it’s a contraction – infinite consciousness must localise itself in a body-mind to speak divinely inspired words. At their origin, the great religions are divine intelligence – the pure formless intelligence of consciousness expressed in a mind completely free of the sense of separation.’"

"In self-enquiry, I look for the separate self as an object and experience it as a cluster of thoughts, feelings and sensations that arises and passes through awareness. It becomes less solid for a moment, but there’s still an immediate pull into a certain someone with needs. When this sense of solidity returns, is it better to rest as awareness or to enquire? And if I enquire, what’s the simplest question? Rupert says: ‘You started with “when I’m practising self-enquiry and I enquire into the separate self” – but self-enquiry is not an enquiry into the separate self. It’s an enquiry into your self. When I asked “tell us about your self”, in the gap before you formulated your answer, you were practising self-enquiry. You weren’t exploring a separate self – you were going to your self. Why are you interested in the separate self? It’s ultimately an illusion – not non-existent, but not what it appears to be. The separate self is awareness clothed in experience, looking temporary and finite. Like (an actor named) John Smith dressed as King Lear. When King Lear practises self-enquiry, he’s not interested in King Lear – he’s interested in who he really is. So don’t go back to the separate self. The finite mind is necessary – it’s what you do, not what you are. Don’t allow thinking and perceiving to become embedded in your identity.’"

"I know who I am – that’s never a question. But sometimes I’m plummeted into ego so fast I can’t even remember to breathe. I do stupid things until I can get back to ‘I am’. How do I reach a place where, in the heat of the moment, I just know to breathe and come back? And do you ever get triggered? Rupert says: ‘In the heat of the moment, it’s too late. Something triggers you, the egoic response is so quick, you’re caught and immersed. But when you’re not being triggered – for instance, now – that’s the time to practise remaining as your self. Being knowingly who you are and thinking and acting from that place. The more we do this throughout the day, the fewer moments of egoic reactivity there are. The centre of gravity of our identity shifts. Do I ever get triggered? Yes. What I’m describing is my own experience – the more established I am in my being, the fewer situations have the capacity to take me out of myself. It happens less frequently, and when it does, it lasts less time. But none of us are perfect. Allow yourself to be triggered from time to time – it’s an old habit, impersonal. It doesn’t invalidate your understanding. It keeps us humane and humble.’"

"When I am ‘being aware’, my presence lights my experience. When I am ‘aware of being’, it’s as if the rays of the sun concentrate on the nucleus. Is there a difference? Rupert says: ‘I use different phrases because they appeal to different people – they’re synonymous in meaning. The danger with “awareness of being” is that it suggests subject-object relationship. Even when we understand there isn’t one, we tend to think awareness performs self-reflection to know itself. That’s not true. The mind has to self-reflect – that’s self-enquiry. But awareness knows itself without self-reflection, just by being. The sun doesn’t turn its light around to shine on itself. There’s no self-reflection in awareness; only the mind has to self-reflect. You said, “I cannot look for myself outside of myself” – exactly. You can only search for something other than yourself. The eyes cannot see themselves. At some stage, when you understand this, you stop looking. You cannot be what you know, and you cannot know objectively what you are.’"

"I’m a tennis coach. When you play, do you still feel tension? Do you still want to win? And if a player chokes during a match, how would you help them get into the moment? Rupert says: ‘I don’t play competitively – I have a very Zen approach. But let me tell you a story. A coach told me about a 14-year-old girl, one of the top players in the U.S. Whenever she messed up, she would smile. It’s so intelligent. Most players make a mistake and contract – then their game deteriorates. She did the opposite. By smiling, she erased any contraction and put herself back in the place of spontaneity and relaxation. That’s what you’re trying to do as a coach – take them to their true nature between each point. At the highest level, the reason great players do things that seem to defy science is precisely because there is no ego in that moment. The ego is a limitation – they expand beyond it. That’s why we love watching them. They’re modelling transcendence for us. The ego comes in before, between points, and after – “wasn’t I brilliant?” or smashing rackets. But in the point itself, there’s no ego. Would you still want to win? Yes – but your identity wouldn’t be invested in whether you won or not. You’re not enhanced by winning or diminished by losing.’"

"There are different descriptions of non-duality – some say it’s the essence pervading everything, others that it’s transcendent and can’t really be known. How do you understand it intellectually, and how can it be experienced? Rupert says: ‘You’re right – non-duality cannot be described or defined. Consciousness is that in terms of which everything else is described – you can’t go back further. So consciousness cannot be defined accurately, but it can be evoked. Hence our use of analogies, metaphors, stories, poetry – not attempts to define consciousness but to evoke recognition. Is it true we can only experience consciousness in its immanent aspect? That would be true but for one experience: the awareness of being. Through the awareness of being, we have direct access to the transcendent nature of consciousness. All other experience is mediated through thought and perception, giving indirect access to the immanent nature. We could do a meditation going deeply into the experience of seeing – reaching into perception to touch the stuff it’s made of. There we’d experience the immanent aspect. Consciousness both transcends perception and is present in perception, as perception – like the screen that precedes the movie but is also its substance.’"

"I’ve shifted from mind-driven Buddhist meditation to 60-90 minutes of sitting in awareness. Peace and stillness are moving from the cushion into daily life. But recently, about half an hour in, I get this great welling up of deep relief and joy. I let it wash up and come back to being – but then I’m exhausted and just want to sleep. Is this part of the process, or is it the mind trying to shut things down? Rupert says: ‘I think it’s the former. Sitting for 30 or 40 minutes is plenty long enough – you shouldn’t impose longer on yourself. What you described is that you rest peacefully in being, and then there’s a spontaneous release. That’s the body responding. Deep tension held in the body is responding to this peace, letting go. That comes with relaxation and joy. And then, as an extension of that, the body’s next response is just to want to curl up and sleep. I would just go with it. Sleep is sometimes a way we avoid – but nothing you’ve said suggests this is an egoic strategy to avoid the emptiness of your true nature. It’s a natural response of your body after its initial release.’"

"I had a very interesting life with addiction that led me down very dark paths, including homelessness. What helped me discover my true nature was plant medicines. What are your thoughts on psychedelic states and how they pertain to the non-dual teachings? Rupert says: ‘I have some experience but very little, and so many friends have been helped by plant medicines – it obviously has its place. I’m not qualified to speak about it. The approach here is very direct; it doesn’t go through substances. But if it’s helped you, that’s beautiful. To your other question about Jesus saying “I am the way, the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father except through me” – you’re absolutely right. “I am” – the awareness of being – is the way. The awareness of being is like a portal in the back of the mind, the only experience not mediated through thought or perception. When Jesus says “no one comes to the Father except through me”, he’s saying the only way to infinite being is through the experience “I am”. It’s pure non-duality, but profoundly misunderstood. “The Father and I are one” – King Lear and John Smith are one. And well done coming through your addiction and through the fundamentalism that followed. Any fundamentalism is an egoic position. Credit to you that you passed through it so quickly.’"

"My niece, a GP doctor, is going through dramatic and traumatic experiences. She’s feeling low and depressed, not enjoying her life. She’s sceptical about spirituality but admits that listening to you makes her feel peace. What advice would you give her? Rupert says: ‘First, she’s lucky to have you as her aunt. Secondly, it’s very good that she’s sceptical – that’s important. She should always check everything against her own sense of integrity and against her own experience. The most important thing for her is that she has this direct contact with her being. All the struggles she’s going through with her work and her life – underneath all that, there is this place in her that is at peace. The most important thing is to find that in yourself and to keep going there, and to bring it into her work as much as she can. It’s difficult for me to say more because I always respond to the person when they’re in front of me. But please send her my very best wishes.’"