You can also want something temporarily just to fill a sense of lack incompletion. Like a one night stand or a drug for the evening. Not really need to posses. But you lose yourself thou only always temporary. Sleep also is temporary relief from sense of being a person.
Neediness drives people away. First become happy and complete within yourself. Then engage in relationships to share that joy with others. Thanks Rupert!
This has been a game changer for me. I started seeing this woman recently who is the most beautiful person I’ve ever met and an incredible company. I noticed I started to become attached but became frightened that she could hurt me as she was too good for me and would probably suss me out as someone who can’t match her. I watched one of Ruperts earlier videos on this topic and it transformed how I relate to her. And she has noticed. She even said how she finds the fact that I am so quietly confident and secure very attractive and inspiring. If anything she’s become a lot needier of me! But that wasn’t the intent of me changing my view of course! Just make sure you don’t forget the first rule either - to express the understanding when you’re with the other person and share laughter and beautiful moments. That’s where the joy comes!
Did You say it to her ? "I dont need you "..aso ? I dare not say it to the Most wonderful man, I am now in freqeunt contact with after many years since we were lovers ! I would be very tankfuld. If you answer me here !❤
@@annabellacrewe8858 yes actually - I did say something along those lines. That I don’t ‘need’ her, but I ‘want’ her in my life to enhance it. I know it seems romantic to say ‘I Need you’ but saying it the other way actually comes across much much better and gets a better reaction. Good luck to you.
Rupert, you are remarkable. I cannot thank you for the wisdom and understanding you so generously share with us all. This subject reminded me of this passage I came across from a free online article called "Love and Relationships" by Marshall Summers "It is certainly possible to feel great love for someone with whom you cannot participate in life, and in fact this is not uncommon.
"When we touch our own consciousness in a full and open way, we are much better able to touch the consciousness of others. We see that awareness is far larger and more ancient than the space defined by our own mind and body. In a deep sense it is boundless, timeless; it connects us all to one another. We are conscious. That satisfies our yearning for belonging in a healthy, nurturing way, empowering us to be more fully ourselves and yet deeply related to others. You belong, as a birthright." -Hayes, Steven C. A Liberated Mind
Many so-called romantic relationships issue forth from a self-perception of incompleteness seeking completeness from/through another person. Which invites the obvious question, why the self-perception of incompleteness in the first, originating place?
Dear Rupert ! This is to me so very deep understanding of human nature ! It makes me very much aware, that I do not try to defend myself and keep on living the shared being even though the other one does not now, what it is All about ❤❤
💖That STATE of Being in The Spiritual Awakening and in the Residing in That True Unconditioned Self lS VERY powerful for lndividual Soul to Arrive in Consciousness and lS The Ultimate Freedom from the world of duality of the human consciousness and of the false personal sense of self🙏Thank You Rupert for Clarifying that Essential Truth💖
I'm conflicted when it comes to this. I'm a 34 year old male and i never had a (romantic) relationship. Despite the attraction i feel for women, the idea of being with somebody all the time repels me. I'm an introvert and love to be by myself most of the time, as i can feel deeply fulfilled by myself. Yet, not having been in a relationship gnawed at me, so years ago i tried dating. But then i was even more repelled, because i immediately saw these women had some sort of image in their head that i needed to fulfill and that i myself did the same. So i quit dating and just accepted that i would be alone. Having meaningless sexual relationships do not interest me by the way. Now i see many relationships around me, in which partners tolerate eachother to make it work. Not a few, but all of them. All romantic relationships that i see have this to some extent. And again, it repels me. But still, there is also a feeling that i'm missing out on something. At least, sometimes. Other times i'm completely fine and i'm grateful i'm free and not in a manipulative relationship like that. Can other people relate to this, or am i alone in this?
Yes, I can totally relate and share your experience and impressions to a very large degree. By the way, you might also find it worthwhile to know that certain personality types are much less inclined towards a romantic relationship than others. It is natural and there is nothing wrong with that. Knowing that you might be one of these personality types might lead to some easing of the feeling that something is wrong with oneself for not being like almost everyone else (if that feeling is there). And of course, that lack of inclination towards a romantic relationship does NOT mean any deficiency in the capacity to love or any dimishment in the innate love that we are. For example, I am not in a romantic relationship and haven't been for a very long time (not for lack of opportunity but for reasons similar to the ones you mentioned) yet the intensity of love that sometimes comes forward in me just brings me to my knees.. I know this to be true of others as well who are also not in a romantic relationship. In fact, some of the most unloving behaviour I've ever witnessed was expressed through people who were in a romantic relationship. Indeed, almost all romantic relationship that i am aware of are largely unloving and are more about posession, exclusion and immature egoic desires and fears than anything else.
This is absolutely what I need to hear. I have listened to this talk several times. I love the idea of testing my love and understanding. It is so frustrating though when the other party doesn't feel the same I do. They are fine with needing me and other's to validate them. How to practice when surrounded by people who are not on the same path? I would love to teach my children this teaching. I am constantly trying to stretch them and would like them to be humans that are not NEEDY.
What was the first message? ‘Love Unconditionally’. It is not a prerequisite for your partner to be on the same path. That’s imposing on them what you need for yourself implying that you ‘need them’ which was the second message. If you require your partner to be on the same path, then you are not loving them unconditionally and you need them to be a certain way, so really you are not on this path either. I’m not criticising, I understand what you are saying, I just feel you are fundamentally missing the point. All of this is very difficult to do, we can only try and practice it.
@@GavDuggan1983 Thank you for your feedback. However I think we are talking from two different points of view. At this time I do not wish elaborate on my point of view as it relates to your feedback.
@@nadegehaygood7017 learn them to be independent. Also if they have a certain passion for me it's art. To do then they can obtain from needing it from others. Self satisfaction. Learn them to not pursue temporary happiness.
There should ideally be a third vow “ I am responsible for you” The “I don’t need you” is a perfect justification for people with a dismissive avoidants attachment style to not care, to not invest in the relationship, to not stand up for you when you so badly need it. We must, in my view, therefore say : “Yes, I don’t need you for my happiness, but I will be there for you when you need me, because I can’t see you suffer” I think this is an important addition to these vows.
This is so applicable to me! I was so happy and content with myself before I met a man who excited me in such a way that I felt to share my happiness with. However as the relationship grew I am 😅finding myself getting more involved and wishing to have more from my partner than he is capable of giving. How do I turn around and get back to myself fully as I was before I met him? Because deep down I know that my partner is not and is ever likely to fulfill my expectation! Can Rupert help me please?
if love is the recognition of one shared being which is eternal, then who will recognize and share that being in the absence of localized self? please Rupert give me your answer with this. I'm looking for your video about this , but I can't find. thank you so much my dear brother. ❤
If there is only consciousness (I do not doubt it), everything without exception must be made of consciousness. In other words, also the "false" identification with the body-mind, must be a creation of consciousness. So... what is the problem to think to be a separate person ? It is consciousness playing the play of separation, with the consequent of suffering.....and it is consciousness which decide to stop or continue this dream..... Obviously, awareness wants to experience limitations and not avoid them. Enjoy the Leela
To me that sounds a bit like going to the doctor with a broken leg and being cured by redefining a broken leg. "A broken leg doesn't really exist because its true nature is consciousness, so you can go home now". At an absolute level that is true, but it doesn't hurt to get treatment either - in fact that is why someone visits a doctor.
@Ruby Badilla Yes.....so where (and for whom?) is the problem when consciousness is identifying with the body mind ? Consciousness likes to have problems, otherwise it would not create suffering
@@leelanjoy "So.... whats the problem to think to be a separate person?" No real problem indeed, but enough reason to visit a doctor. Besides why did you even bother to respond, if there's only consciousness?
It is sad to think that most people think that need is love, and they sustain fragile relationships on that basis, pointless really, and hard work I suspect
Hai there.. If we call it fredom or love.. Is it true that the love always waiting me, or searching me, or show me that we are love n beloved?? Please any one, help me... I fell that the pure consciousness always try or show me that who really i am and invite me to become one with all... Is that true sir?
A guy who looks like Ted Bundy teaching non-duality, absolute love, pure awareness, oneness with incredible clarity and zest. Isn't it ironical :p Rupert is a legend of neo-advaita teachings. I am from Ramana Maharishi's place. I started with him. And I really did not understand all of Ramana's teachings because Ramana answered questions of different aspirants. He just answered their questions and he adjusted his answers keeping them in perspective with the questioner. I have no doubt Ramana would have answered my questions perfectly had I asked him directly. Unfortunately his physical presence has ceased. I feel Rupert is doing what seekers like me want. Answering questions in simple, understandable and yet direct terms. He is a gift to mankind as was Ramana
Rupert describes human behavior and the future in a realm of remembering internalizing and saying commands such as: "I don't need you!" She says "I understand but these old patterns of behavior are still present" Rupert describes remembering, internalizing, and saying commands as understanding-- which is the assertion of the ego identifying with meanings as opposed to consciously managing meanings and human behaviors. Rupert's speaking covers up and displaces the divine feminine with egoic commands, assertions, and assumptions about the meaning of understanding. Ruperts's defense mechanisms indicate that he has conflated the divine feminine with alienation/rejection/abandonment/abuse. The divine feminine is the experience and gaze for the internal feedback that reveals the depths beyond the surfaces-- including and not limited to feelings, sensations, emotional reactions, innate interpretations, and developmental needs. The divine feminine is the fundamental basis for homeostasis, integrity, awareness, well-being, masculinity, response-ability, connection, workability, reality testing, science, medicine, and the service industry.
There is only one true love and it's purest form in the world is simple, ungrasping friendship, whether it be between peers, parent and child, or human and pet. Romance, on the other hand, usually involves projecting fantasy and physical attraction, mistakingly associating the spirit with appearance, identifying the "other" as a body and wanting them as such. Let's not fool ourselves by giving romance more meaning than it has, it's a play of Maya. To quote the Course in Miracles, "Perhaps you think different kinds of love are possible. Perhaps you think there is a kind of love for this, a kind for that; a way of loving one, another way of loving still another. Love is one. It has no separate parts and no degrees; no kinds nor levels, no divergencies and no distinctions. It is like itself, unchanged throughout. It never alters with a person or a circumstance."
🙏I would change the term: "l do Not need You".. it lS Not appropriate BECAUSE it gives lmpression of being self centered.. lnstead the more appropriate term lS: "l Am Not dependen on You".. lS freeing of expectation for both.. the former term gives NEGATIVE sense of c o l d n e s s and isolation .. While The later energy quality lS Opening up s p a c e for being c a r i n g and mantaining lnner Self Reliantce and lndependentcy while keeping genuine warmth between tow couple ..💖
The schizophrenic play of consciousness: The teacher is telling to the disciple to discover his true Self and in the second step to find out the nature of this Self, which has no form, no limit and which no knife can kill. In other words: Consciousness is telling Consciousness to discover Consciousness and to find the nature of Consciousness. Crazy
just classic but with compassion... seems like mostly the the women are ... well, anyway this was 4 years ago and only 117 comments... 8billon people on the planet yes? we're fucked... Perhaps that's why Buddah was always laughing!🤣
I don't think the romantic type of love is special. And I am started to think that the romantic type of love isn't real. I mean about more than half of romantic couples either break up with each other or divorce each other, while most platonic best friends remain friends until death. Also, most people are pretty much comfortable enough to be naked around someone and have sex with someone that they have no romantic feelings towards. So sex isn't really a thing about romance. I think that having a platonic best friend is a lot better than having a romantic partner or spouse is. Having someone who's like a sibling to you is a lot better than having a romantic partner is. Also, you would more likely be much closer to a person who's like a brother or sister to you than you would be with a partner or spouse. People tend to fight with their partner or spouse a lot more than they do with a platonic best friend, and you never fight with your best friend the way you fight with your partner or spouse. Partners and spouses are just temporary. If you break up or divorce them, it's hard to go back to them. With your platonic best friend, you're going to make things work, because they are your best friend, they are your go to partner. It's always easier to make amends with them than it is with a romantic partner or spouse. Also, there are a lot of toxic romantic relationships, while there isn't that many toxic platonic relationships. Like an example is that abuse happens a lot in romantic relationships, while abuse is rare in platonic relationships. So there is a lot of abusive romantic relationships, while there is isn't that many abusive platonic relationships. Why do you think abusive romantic relationships have a term for them called "domestic violence", while abusive platonic relationships don't have a term for them? It's because abuse in platonic relationships are very rare, while abuse in romantic relationships happens a lot. And also, a lot of people cheat on their romantic partners with someone else, while most people won't do stuff like that with their platonic best friends.
lso, I heard that most people can live a life without romance and can still be happy. But most of the time, if someone doesn't have any platonic friends in their life, it can effect them really bad mentally; much worse than living a life without a romantic partner. In today's world, less people are dating and getting married now, and they seem to be more happy being single rather than being in romantic relationship with someone. Also, You're going to have a much deeper spoken understanding and connection with your best friend than you are with a romantic partner or spouse. So those are other reasons why romantic love isn't real or special, while platonic love is.
And also, it seems that fathers usually hate it whenever their daughter gets a boyfriend (even if the boyfriend is a good guy), and it seems that they often hate the idea of their daughter dating, and many fathers seem against the idea of their daughters dating. There are even shirts made for daughters that say "I'M NOT ALLOWED TO EVER DATE" and shirts made for fathers that say "DADS AGAINST DAUGHTERS DATING". Brothers also tend to act the same way that fathers do whenever their sister gets a boyfriend (even if the boyfriend is a good guy). It seems brothers (like fathers) hate the idea of their sisters dating. So it seems that most fathers don't ever want their daughters to find love and be in a romantic relationship with someone, and it also seems that most brothers don't ever want their sisters to find love and be in a romantic relationship with someone. So those could also be other reasons why the concept of romantic relationships isn't a good thing because of how protective fathers and brothers tend to be whenever their daughter or sister dates someone.
@@icysnow57cold64 However, protective fathers and brothers also date other women by themselves. Without the protective father dating and marrying a woman, where would the daughter come from?
@@JessMaccain You think most fathers and brothers are hypocrites who think that way? Also, what if someday that the human race ditches the concept of romance and romantic relationships? The human race can still reproduce without romance or even without sex. There's a lot of ways a woman can get pregnant without sex, and artificial insemination is one of them. The parents of a child don't have to be in a relationship in order to raise a child, and two parents aren't necessary for the growth and development of a child. A child can be raised by only one parent and still turn out fine. If someday that the human race ditches the concept of romance and romantic relationships, and got rid of stuff like dating and marriage, fathers and brothers would be happy about it since they wouldn't ever have to worry about their daughters and sisters ever dating if that ever happened.
@@icysnow57cold64 The core issue is what exactly are the fathers and brothers worried about? Are you a father/brother yourself and do you know exactly what you are worried about? What other men can do for you to not worry about your daughters / sisters dating? ......Many mums are already giving birth by themselves without a husband aside - yet they are still dating and loving. I've never heard of a woman who just gave birth to a child without ever loving a man during her entire life.
“To love is freedom, to want is possession”.
You can also want something temporarily just to fill a sense of lack incompletion. Like a one night stand or a drug for the evening. Not really need to posses. But you lose yourself thou only always temporary. Sleep also is temporary relief from sense of being a person.
Neediness drives people away.
First become happy and complete within yourself.
Then engage in relationships to share that joy with others.
Thanks Rupert!
this man... speaks with an authority that no one in the parliament ever will
"I don't need you" - perfection!
Yes thought the same when he said it
And at the same time, I need you (deep desire) is what enflames lovers...
This has been a game changer for me. I started seeing this woman recently who is the most beautiful person I’ve ever met and an incredible company. I noticed I started to become attached but became frightened that she could hurt me as she was too good for me and would probably suss me out as someone who can’t match her. I watched one of Ruperts earlier videos on this topic and it transformed how I relate to her. And she has noticed. She even said how she finds the fact that I am so quietly confident and secure very attractive and inspiring. If anything she’s become a lot needier of me! But that wasn’t the intent of me changing my view of course! Just make sure you don’t forget the first rule either - to express the understanding when you’re with the other person and share laughter and beautiful moments. That’s where the joy comes!
Matt Stocks I Hope she’s not a personality disordered narcissist, mate.
Did You say it to her ? "I dont need you "..aso ? I dare not say it to the Most wonderful man, I am now in freqeunt contact with after many years since we were lovers ! I would be very tankfuld. If you answer me here !❤
❤For You and your partner❤
@@annabellacrewe8858 yes actually - I did say something along those lines. That I don’t ‘need’ her, but I ‘want’ her in my life to enhance it. I know it seems romantic to say ‘I Need you’ but saying it the other way actually comes across much much better and gets a better reaction. Good luck to you.
@@mattstocks4749 Hi Matt ! Yess, words can make the true difference, if heart consciousness is used ! I shall try !♥️
Rupert, you are remarkable. I cannot thank you for the wisdom and understanding you so generously share with us all.
This subject reminded me of this passage I came across from a free online article called "Love and Relationships" by Marshall Summers
"It is certainly possible to feel great love for someone with whom you cannot participate in life, and in fact this is not uncommon.
Thank you for sharing
One of my favorite articles.
sharing happiness, that's a good reason to get married
"When we touch our own consciousness in a full and open way, we are much better able to touch the consciousness of others. We see that awareness is far larger and more ancient than the space defined by our own mind and body. In a deep sense it is boundless, timeless; it connects us all to one another. We are conscious. That satisfies our yearning for belonging in a healthy, nurturing way, empowering us to be more fully ourselves and yet deeply related to others. You belong, as a birthright." -Hayes, Steven C. A Liberated Mind
Thank you for sharing this.
Many so-called romantic relationships issue forth from a self-perception of incompleteness seeking completeness from/through another person. Which invites the obvious question, why the self-perception of incompleteness in the first, originating place?
Whenever I watch Rupert's video,I feel deeply calm ,I tune into his state .I experience of being aware with out much effort from my side😇
Wow…beautiful. Thank you so much.
This was soooo very helpful!♥️
Dear Rupert ! This is to me so very deep understanding of human nature ! It makes me very much aware, that I do not try to defend myself and keep on living the shared being even though the other one does not now, what it is All about ❤❤
Wow!! This is gold
Beautiful!!!
Incredible ❤️🙏🏾🙏🏾
I salute you for this Rupert. Salute. Salute.
Rupert.. special message ❤️
💖That STATE of Being in The Spiritual Awakening and in the Residing in That True Unconditioned Self lS VERY powerful for lndividual Soul to Arrive in Consciousness and lS The Ultimate Freedom from the world of duality of the human consciousness and of the false personal sense of self🙏Thank You Rupert for Clarifying that Essential Truth💖
Thank you Rupert 😘
Magic ⭐️
Most love relationships have paramnesia for their father and need for their mother.
Namaste 😊😉
I'm conflicted when it comes to this. I'm a 34 year old male and i never had a (romantic) relationship. Despite the attraction i feel for women, the idea of being with somebody all the time repels me. I'm an introvert and love to be by myself most of the time, as i can feel deeply fulfilled by myself. Yet, not having been in a relationship gnawed at me, so years ago i tried dating. But then i was even more repelled, because i immediately saw these women had some sort of image in their head that i needed to fulfill and that i myself did the same. So i quit dating and just accepted that i would be alone. Having meaningless sexual relationships do not interest me by the way. Now i see many relationships around me, in which partners tolerate eachother to make it work. Not a few, but all of them. All romantic relationships that i see have this to some extent. And again, it repels me. But still, there is also a feeling that i'm missing out on something. At least, sometimes. Other times i'm completely fine and i'm grateful i'm free and not in a manipulative relationship like that. Can other people relate to this, or am i alone in this?
Yes, I can totally relate and share your experience and impressions to a very large degree.
By the way, you might also find it worthwhile to know that certain personality types are much less inclined towards a romantic relationship than others. It is natural and there is nothing wrong with that. Knowing that you might be one of these personality types might lead to some easing of the feeling that something is wrong with oneself for not being like almost everyone else (if that feeling is there).
And of course, that lack of inclination towards a romantic relationship does NOT mean any deficiency in the capacity to love or any dimishment in the innate love that we are. For example, I am not in a romantic relationship and haven't been for a very long time (not for lack of opportunity but for reasons similar to the ones you mentioned) yet the intensity of love that sometimes comes forward in me just brings me to my knees..
I know this to be true of others as well who are also not in a romantic relationship.
In fact, some of the most unloving behaviour I've ever witnessed was expressed through people who were in a romantic relationship. Indeed, almost all romantic relationship that i am aware of are largely unloving and are more about posession, exclusion and immature egoic desires and fears than anything else.
I celebrate you brother. What you've shared sounds like a very healthy place to be.
I can totally relate and still searching for an anwser
Totally relate with you !
Was your childhood traumatic in some way? Eg an authoritarian father or over bearing mother? Just curious
This is absolutely what I need to hear. I have listened to this talk several times. I love the idea of testing my love and understanding. It is so frustrating though when the other party doesn't feel the same I do. They are fine with needing me and other's to validate them. How to practice when surrounded by people who are not on the same path?
I would love to teach my children this teaching. I am constantly trying to stretch them and would like them to be humans that are not NEEDY.
What was the first message? ‘Love Unconditionally’. It is not a prerequisite for your partner to be on the same path. That’s imposing on them what you need for yourself implying that you ‘need them’ which was the second message. If you require your partner to be on the same path, then you are not loving them unconditionally and you need them to be a certain way, so really you are not on this path either. I’m not criticising, I understand what you are saying, I just feel you are fundamentally missing the point. All of this is very difficult to do, we can only try and practice it.
@@GavDuggan1983 Thank you for your feedback. However I think we are talking from two different points of view. At this time I do not wish elaborate on my point of view as it relates to your feedback.
@@nadegehaygood7017 learn them to be independent. Also if they have a certain passion for me it's art. To do then they can obtain from needing it from others. Self satisfaction. Learn them to not pursue temporary happiness.
The questioner seems really wise. Seems like she would be a nice person.
I want a date :)
There should ideally be a third vow
“ I am responsible for you”
The “I don’t need you” is a perfect justification for people with a dismissive avoidants attachment style to not care, to not invest in the relationship, to not stand up for you when you so badly need it.
We must, in my view, therefore say :
“Yes, I don’t need you for my happiness, but I will be there for you when you need me, because I can’t see you suffer”
I think this is an important addition to these vows.
why would another, be responsible for your emotional states? #Autonomy #Independence
It contradicts the second vow.
Absolutely loved this video. Thank you so much for this valuable information. Lots of love from an Australian 🇦🇺❤
Connect with God first..
I say this to my partner all the time & he says men like being needed 😅😆 but maybe mine comes from an independent place of rejection unintentionally.
I think it's more their natural want to be useful - he might actually just use the word "needed" for the word useful.
I don't need you, but I love you
This is so applicable to me! I was so happy and content with myself before I met a man who excited me in such a way that I felt to share my happiness with. However as the relationship grew I am 😅finding myself getting more involved and wishing to have more from my partner than he is capable of giving. How do I turn around and get back to myself fully as I was before I met him? Because deep down I know that my partner is not and is ever likely to fulfill my expectation! Can Rupert help me please?
if love is the recognition of one shared being which is eternal, then who will recognize and share that being in the absence of localized self?
please Rupert give me your answer with this. I'm looking for your video about this , but I can't find. thank you so much my dear brother. ❤
If there is only consciousness (I do not doubt it), everything without exception must be made of consciousness. In other words, also the "false" identification with the body-mind, must be a creation of consciousness. So... what is the problem to think to be a separate person ? It is consciousness playing the play of separation, with the consequent of suffering.....and it is consciousness which decide to stop or continue this dream.....
Obviously, awareness wants to experience limitations and not avoid them.
Enjoy the Leela
To me that sounds a bit like going to the doctor with a broken leg and being cured by redefining a broken leg. "A broken leg doesn't really exist because its true nature is consciousness, so you can go home now". At an absolute level that is true, but it doesn't hurt to get treatment either - in fact that is why someone visits a doctor.
@Ruby Badilla Yes.....so where (and for whom?) is the problem when consciousness is identifying with the body mind ? Consciousness likes to have problems, otherwise it would not create suffering
@@curiosity_saved_the_cat At an absolute level it is true and at the relative level we look for a doctor. So what ?
@@leelanjoy "So.... whats the problem to think to be a separate person?" No real problem indeed, but enough reason to visit a doctor. Besides why did you even bother to respond, if there's only consciousness?
@@curiosity_saved_the_cat Ramana Maharshi answer to all "Why" questions...."Why not". Why not answer ? Answer or not answer is the same.
It is sad to think that most people think that need is love, and they sustain fragile relationships on that basis, pointless really, and hard work I suspect
Totally, it is sad, especially from the bigger picture perspective.
Hai there.. If we call it fredom or love.. Is it true that the love always waiting me, or searching me, or show me that we are love n beloved?? Please any one, help me... I fell that the pure consciousness always try or show me that who really i am and invite me to become one with all... Is that true sir?
A guy who looks like Ted Bundy teaching non-duality, absolute love, pure awareness, oneness with incredible clarity and zest. Isn't it ironical :p
Rupert is a legend of neo-advaita teachings. I am from Ramana Maharishi's place. I started with him. And I really did not understand all of Ramana's teachings because Ramana answered questions of different aspirants. He just answered their questions and he adjusted his answers keeping them in perspective with the questioner. I have no doubt Ramana would have answered my questions perfectly had I asked him directly. Unfortunately his physical presence has ceased.
I feel Rupert is doing what seekers like me want. Answering questions in simple, understandable and yet direct terms. He is a gift to mankind as was Ramana
Sounds like she's involved with someone who doesn't match her consciousness .. "demand a certain integrity from them"
Rupert describes human behavior and the future in a realm of remembering internalizing and saying commands such as: "I don't need you!"
She says "I understand but these old patterns of behavior are still present"
Rupert describes remembering, internalizing, and saying commands as understanding-- which is the assertion of the ego identifying with meanings as opposed to consciously managing meanings and human behaviors.
Rupert's speaking covers up and displaces the divine feminine with egoic commands, assertions, and assumptions about the meaning of understanding. Ruperts's defense mechanisms indicate that he has conflated the divine feminine with alienation/rejection/abandonment/abuse.
The divine feminine is the experience and gaze for the internal feedback that reveals the depths beyond the surfaces-- including and not limited to feelings, sensations, emotional reactions, innate interpretations, and developmental needs.
The divine feminine is the fundamental basis for homeostasis, integrity, awareness, well-being, masculinity, response-ability, connection, workability, reality testing, science, medicine, and the service industry.
Ah let me guess, you are one of the 144k special ones who are going to save the humanity from the dark aliens?
@@Austination316please describe the connection between what I described and what you wrote.
@@Mike_Lennox what I mean is that what you are saying is new age bullshit
@@Mike_Lennox I mean what you are saying in all your posts is new age bs
@@Austination316 can you pick something out that is causing your unconscious emotional reaction and connect it with reality?
There is only one true love and it's purest form in the world is simple, ungrasping friendship, whether it be between peers, parent and child, or human and pet. Romance, on the other hand, usually involves projecting fantasy and physical attraction, mistakingly associating the spirit with appearance, identifying the "other" as a body and wanting them as such. Let's not fool ourselves by giving romance more meaning than it has, it's a play of Maya.
To quote the Course in Miracles, "Perhaps you think different kinds of love are possible. Perhaps you think there is a kind of love for this, a kind for that; a way of loving one, another way of loving still another. Love is one. It has no separate parts and no degrees; no kinds nor levels, no divergencies and no distinctions. It is like itself, unchanged throughout. It never alters with a person or a circumstance."
🙏I would change the term: "l do
Not need You".. it lS Not appropriate BECAUSE it gives lmpression of being self centered.. lnstead the more appropriate term lS: "l Am Not dependen on You".. lS freeing of expectation for both.. the former term gives NEGATIVE sense of c o l d n e s s and isolation .. While The later energy quality lS Opening up s p a c e for being c a r i n g and mantaining lnner Self Reliantce and lndependentcy while keeping genuine warmth between tow couple ..💖
The schizophrenic play of consciousness:
The teacher is telling to the disciple to discover his true Self and in the second step to find out the nature of this Self, which has no form, no limit and which no knife can kill.
In other words:
Consciousness is telling Consciousness to discover Consciousness and to find the nature of Consciousness.
Crazy
just classic but with compassion... seems like mostly the the women are ... well, anyway this was 4 years ago and only 117 comments... 8billon people on the planet yes? we're fucked... Perhaps that's why Buddah was always laughing!🤣
🧚🏻♂️☯️🌌🦅
Love Rupert, but good luck with that one, "I don't need you". Lol
I don't even need to be here ...I can leave. ^^
😁😍👽👍⚛️
I don't think the romantic type of love is special. And I am started to think that the romantic type of love isn't real. I mean about more than half of romantic couples either break up with each other or divorce each other, while most platonic best friends remain friends until death.
Also, most people are pretty much comfortable enough to be naked around someone and have sex with someone that they have no romantic feelings towards. So sex isn't really a thing about romance.
I think that having a platonic best friend is a lot better than having a romantic partner or spouse is. Having someone who's like a sibling to you is a lot better than having a romantic partner is. Also, you would more likely be much closer to a person who's like a brother or sister to you than you would be with a partner or spouse.
People tend to fight with their partner or spouse a lot more than they do with a platonic best friend, and you never fight with your best friend the way you fight with your partner or spouse. Partners and spouses are just temporary. If you break up or divorce them, it's hard to go back to them. With your platonic best friend, you're going to make things work, because they are your best friend, they are your go to partner. It's always easier to make amends with them than it is with a romantic partner or spouse.
Also, there are a lot of toxic romantic relationships, while there isn't that many toxic platonic relationships. Like an example is that abuse happens a lot in romantic relationships, while abuse is rare in platonic relationships. So there is a lot of abusive romantic relationships, while there is isn't that many abusive platonic relationships.
Why do you think abusive romantic relationships have a term for them called "domestic violence", while abusive platonic relationships don't have a term for them? It's because abuse in platonic relationships are very rare, while abuse in romantic relationships happens a lot.
And also, a lot of people cheat on their romantic partners with someone else, while most people won't do stuff like that with their platonic best friends.
lso, I heard that most people can live a life without romance and can still be happy. But most of the time, if someone doesn't have any platonic friends in their life, it can effect them really bad mentally; much worse than living a life without a romantic partner. In today's world, less people are dating and getting married now, and they seem to be more happy being single rather than being in romantic relationship with someone.
Also, You're going to have a much deeper spoken understanding and connection with your best friend than you are with a romantic partner or spouse.
So those are other reasons why romantic love isn't real or special, while platonic love is.
And also, it seems that fathers usually hate it whenever their daughter gets a boyfriend (even if the boyfriend is a good guy), and it seems that they often hate the idea of their daughter dating, and many fathers seem against the idea of their daughters dating. There are even shirts made for daughters that say "I'M NOT ALLOWED TO EVER DATE" and shirts made for fathers that say "DADS AGAINST DAUGHTERS DATING".
Brothers also tend to act the same way that fathers do whenever their sister gets a boyfriend (even if the boyfriend is a good guy). It seems brothers (like fathers) hate the idea of their sisters dating.
So it seems that most fathers don't ever want their daughters to find love and be in a romantic relationship with someone, and it also seems that most brothers don't ever want their sisters to find love and be in a romantic relationship with someone.
So those could also be other reasons why the concept of romantic relationships isn't a good thing because of how protective fathers and brothers tend to be whenever their daughter or sister dates someone.
@@icysnow57cold64 However, protective fathers and brothers also date other women by themselves. Without the protective father dating and marrying a woman, where would the daughter come from?
@@JessMaccain You think most fathers and brothers are hypocrites who think that way?
Also, what if someday that the human race ditches the concept of romance and romantic relationships? The human race can still reproduce without romance or even without sex. There's a lot of ways a woman can get pregnant without sex, and artificial insemination is one of them.
The parents of a child don't have to be in a relationship in order to raise a child, and two parents aren't necessary for the growth and development of a child. A child can be raised by only one parent and still turn out fine.
If someday that the human race ditches the concept of romance and romantic relationships, and got rid of stuff like dating and marriage, fathers and brothers would be happy about it since they wouldn't ever have to worry about their daughters and sisters ever dating if that ever happened.
@@icysnow57cold64 The core issue is what exactly are the fathers and brothers worried about? Are you a father/brother yourself and do you know exactly what you are worried about? What other men can do for you to not worry about your daughters / sisters dating? ......Many mums are already giving birth by themselves without a husband aside - yet they are still dating and loving. I've never heard of a woman who just gave birth to a child without ever loving a man during her entire life.