Feeling Trust in Relationships | Rupert Spira
Summary
TLDRThe transcript explores the theme of trust and security in relationships, suggesting that true trust should be placed in the unchanging and ever-present aspects of life rather than in the transient nature of human relationships. It delves into the concept of solipsism, questioning the limitations of the mind's knowledge and advocating for a shift in perspective towards an understanding of limitless awareness. The dialogue encourages embracing the infinite and ever-present nature of consciousness, which can lead to deeper, more authentic connections and a more fulfilling life experience.
Takeaways
- 😣 The inability to trust a friend due to fear of abandonment can lead to emotional distress.
- 🔒 Trust should be placed in that which is stable and unchanging, as opposed to the transient nature of relationships.
- 🧘♂️ The speaker emphasizes the importance of self-honesty and recognizing the impermanence of external relationships for emotional security.
- 🌟 The concept of investing one's identity and happiness in something secure and unchanging is introduced as a path to inner peace.
- 🤔 The speaker questions the reliability of the mind's knowledge, suggesting that it is limited and cannot provide absolute truth.
- 🤝 Despite the impermanence of relationships, the speaker does not discourage forming connections but advises not to rely on them for one's core sense of well-being.
- 💡 The idea that awareness or consciousness is unlimited and unchanging is presented as a foundation for a more secure and fulfilling life.
- 🌈 The speaker suggests that by not investing happiness in external relationships, one can actually enhance the quality and depth of those relationships.
- 🤔 The concept of solipsism is discussed, and the speaker argues against the belief that one's mind is the only mind, based on the inherent limitations of the mind.
- 🌟 The speaker encourages living life based on the experience of unlimited awareness, suggesting that this approach can lead to a more authentic and satisfying existence.
Q & A
What is the main theme discussed in the script?
-The main theme discussed in the script revolves around the concept of trust, the nature of relationships, and the idea that one should only trust what is stable and unchanging, suggesting that true security comes from within and is not dependent on external relationships.
Why does the speaker suggest that it's not advisable to trust in relationships for security?
-The speaker suggests that trusting in relationships for security is not advisable because relationships are inherently changeable and intermittent. They argue that true trust should be placed in something that is always present, unchanging, and reliable, which is not characteristic of human relationships.
What does the speaker mean by 'invest your security in that which is secure'?
-The speaker means that one should place their sense of security and well-being in something that is constant and unchanging, such as one's own consciousness or awareness, rather than in external, variable elements like relationships or material possessions.
How does the speaker define 'trust' in the context of the conversation?
-In the context of the conversation, the speaker defines 'trust' as the ability to rely on something that is always present, stable, and unchanging. It is the assurance that the object of trust will not disappoint or change in a way that affects the trust placed in it.
What is the implication of the speaker's view on relationships and personal security?
-The implication of the speaker's view is that individuals should not rely on relationships for their core sense of security and happiness. Instead, they should develop a sense of self-reliance and find security within themselves, which can lead to healthier and more authentic relationships.
Why does the speaker argue that the mind's knowledge is not reliable?
-The speaker argues that the mind's knowledge is not reliable because it is always changing, limited, and subject to the individual's perceptions and experiences. It is not a constant or absolute source of truth, and thus cannot be the basis for true trust.
What is the speaker's perspective on the nature of awareness?
-The speaker posits that awareness is unlimited, ever-present, and does not have boundaries. They suggest that awareness is the only constant in our experience and should be the foundation upon which we base our trust and understanding of reality.
How does the speaker address the concept of solipsism in the script?
-The speaker addresses solipsism by suggesting that the mind's limited perspective cannot provide absolute knowledge about reality. They argue that because the mind is limited, its beliefs, including solipsism, are not reliable and should not be the basis for understanding the nature of reality.
What practical advice does the speaker give regarding relationships and personal happiness?
-The speaker advises to let go of the need to control or rely on others for happiness and security. They suggest embracing the understanding that true happiness and security come from within and are not dependent on external relationships or circumstances.
How does the speaker propose one should live their life in alignment with the understanding of unlimited awareness?
-The speaker proposes that one should live their life by thinking, feeling, perceiving, and relating from the perspective of unlimited, ever-present awareness. This involves acting in a way that is consistent with the understanding that awareness is not limited and observing how one's experience responds to this approach.
Outlines
😔 Trust and the Illusion of Security in Relationships
The speaker discusses the challenges of trust in interpersonal relationships, highlighting the futility of relying on others for a sense of security. They emphasize that true trust can only be placed in something constant and unchanging, as opposed to the transient nature of human relationships. The speaker suggests that seeking security in relationships is a recipe for misery and that one should instead find security within oneself, recognizing the inherent instability of external connections.
💔 The Liberating Effect of Non-Attachment
This paragraph explores the idea that by not investing one's happiness or security in external objects or relationships, one can develop a healthier and more authentic relationship with the world. The speaker argues that this approach enhances one's capacity for love and intimacy, as relationships are no longer a battleground for personal egos seeking validation. Instead, they become a celebration of shared identity, leading to a more profound and fulfilling connection with others.
🤔 Challenging the Solipsistic View of Reality
The speaker addresses the philosophical concept of solipsism, which posits that one's own mind is the only mind in existence. They argue against this by suggesting that the mind, being limited, cannot have absolute knowledge about anything, including its own limitations. The speaker encourages questioning the assumption of solipsism by considering the nature of awareness and the limitations of the mind's knowledge, suggesting that awareness itself may be limitless and not confined to individual experiences.
🔍 The Infinite Nature of Awareness
In this paragraph, the speaker delves into the concept of awareness, suggesting that it is unlimited and ever-present. They challenge the listener to consider whether they have ever experienced a limit to their awareness and propose that it is more rational to assume that awareness is infinite rather than presuming it is limited based on the absence of evidence. The speaker encourages living in accordance with this understanding, as the experience that follows may serve as a testament to the truth of such a perspective.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Trust
💡Awareness
💡Solipsism
💡Security
💡Mind
💡Intimacy
💡Fickleness
💡Identity
💡Experience
💡Reality
💡Limitations
Highlights
The fear of lack stems from an inability to trust others, which is a fundamental issue.
Trust should be placed in something stable and unchanging, not in relationships that are inherently variable.
The concept of trust is explored through the lens of stability and presence, rather than changeability.
The idea that one can only trust something that is always present and never changes is introduced.
The speaker emphasizes that trust in relationships is a recipe for misery if they are seen as the ultimate source of security.
Investing one's security in something secure, like one's own consciousness, is recommended over external relationships.
The speaker suggests that true security comes from within and is not dependent on external circumstances.
The concept of solipsism is discussed, questioning the belief that one's mind is the only mind that exists.
The limited nature of the mind is contrasted with unlimited awareness, suggesting that the mind cannot provide absolute truth.
The speaker argues that the mind's knowledge is not reliable because it is always changing and not always present.
The idea that one's awareness is limitless and not confined to a physical location is presented.
The speaker challenges the notion of presuming limits to awareness without having experienced them.
The possibility that all experiences are happening within one singular awareness is explored.
The speaker suggests that the same awareness can experience an infinite number of perceptions over time.
The concept of basing one's life on the experience of unlimited awareness is proposed as a way to change one's experience.
The importance of leading one's life consistent with the understanding of unlimited awareness is emphasized.
The speaker concludes by encouraging the listener to base their actions and relationships on the experience of unlimited awareness.
Transcripts
now here have an example does they have a really dear friend a very close friend who
sees another friend who she's also a very good friend whenever she sees the other friend I get
completely reactive and she says you don't have to worry about this and I absolutely and this
has been going on for months and months a month and I absolutely seem to be unable to trust her
that she isn't going to leave or going away would that be the fear of lack because I'm trying to get
through the bond walk yeah you go quite right you can't trust her bags I knew it I'm sorry to give
you that that's not very reassuring news yeah you have to be honest with yourself you can't
trust her you can't trust it anybody now but when I say that I don't mean that you can't
trust your friend to to to to to be honest to be and that's not what I'm saying well
I'm saying something more more more absolute more fundamental than that you can only trust
something that is stable that never changes that is always present Trust means I can always rely on
this so if you want to trust something you have to rely you have to trust that which is always
present that which never changes that which is not dependent on on the state of state of your
mind for instance because to trust something that is always vacillating that is moving and changing
and appearing and disappearing it's madness to try and trust something that is intermittent because
when it's not present what are you trusting in so to trust in anything a person an object and
mind a body including your own mind and body it is it is madness you have to trust what is
reliable in your experience now I'm not speaking relatively of course in in relationships that
there's a level of craft and openness and honesty please don't misunderstand me of course that is
the case but if you really want to invest your security in something you have to invest it in
that which is secure to invest it in something that is intermittent like a relationship with
a friend is just a recipe for misery you have to face that fact if you want security invest
your security in that which is secure now what is secure in your experience what has never left
you down what has never been parted from you what has never changed what has never moved
what has never disappeared what has never judged you what is secure in your experience I perfect I
consciousness to invest your identity your security and your desire for happiness in
anything other than that is madness it's a recipe for unhappiness and you have to
wear grown-up now you know we're not kids you have to face that fact yeah your girlfriend
your wife she might leave you so my mind all of our friends are upon us we have no idea
they might fall in love tomorrow and and leave it's possible it happens all the time to to to
invest one's security in something that is so fickle now and actually fickle I don't mean the
person the character but something that is so fleeting something that is so changeable
thank you that's very helpful that this is this is not a real I'm not I know you don't misunderstand
me but please don't think that the implications of what is being said is that we shouldn't have
intimate relationships that we shouldn't commit ourselves in marriage or have children no of
course it's fine to do all of that but deep in our hearts we know that that's of all a form it's a
it's a convention we can do that if we want or not but we should never really commit our hearts to
anything other than that which is absolutely true and real and strangely if we do that our capacity
for for instance intimate intimacy in friendship doesn't diminish it grows we are more able to have
truly loving relationships my wife has just walked in its lucky she wasn't here a few minutes ago
so that's the beauty of this is is that if we if we if we don't invest our happiness or security
in an object or a relationship it actually gives us the right relationship to objects
and others we actually are able to appreciate objects more we are appreciate the world more
we become more sensitive to the world and it particularly in relationships our capacity
to have truly loving intimate relationships either in intimate relationship or just in
friendship increases our friendships really blossom as a result of this understanding
because they are no longer a kind of battleground between two egos trying to
derive their sense of love and happiness from the other they are a true celebration of our
shared identity so let your friend go just totally let her go do what she wants to do
this is something I struggle with from time to time is there a way to disprove solipsism in my
direct experience the way to disprove solipsism is to come to the understanding that mind is
mind as mind is limited therefore the mind cannot have any true knowledge about anything when I say
mind as mind I mean the stuff that the temporary the the stuff that the limited mind is made of
is unlimited awareness but from the limited minds point of view the knowledge that the limited mind
has is always a reflection of its own limitations therefore nothing the mind knows is absolutely
true that should be enough to let you know that the minds belief that the solipsistic belief that
my mind is the only mind there is is not reliable knowledge nothing your mind knows is reliable it
can be relatively true but don't rely on your mind for for absolute truth my awareness is there any
how it feels like an inference that all experience is happening within this one my awareness I'm
aware of my experience within this singular awareness but you know clearly I'm not aware that
any of these other experiences could even exist okay so when you say I am aware of my limited
experience tell us what you know about that I am aware not the limited mind that you are aware of
but the one that is aware of it the I that am and that is aware tell us about what you know of that
one nice sense that it's let's see that it's here where I am there's no I don't sense a boundary to
it okay so if you don't sense a boundary to it when you say it is here where I am what do you
mean by here do you mean a physical location no no perfect okay you don't send a sense of boundary
to it you have no excuse you awareness have no knowledge of a boundary in yourself so if you have
no knowledge of a boundary in yourself how could there be more than one awareness if there were
two awareness is for instance then each of those awarenesses would have to have a boundary yeah but
I think that's that's what I'm saying is that have you ever experienced a boundary to awareness know
why presume there is one I I don't perfect yeah that's good have you ever experienced a limit to
the knowledge that your mind knows for instance is your mind always present no is it is its knowledge
stable does it always remain the same under all conditions no how long does a thought last
a few seconds so the minds knowledge is not reliable it's not always present and it's
always changing so the mind can't you give you any reliable information about reality
so is that the is it is it merely because it's a thought that is produced by the mind
that is making reference to any kind of separate experiences at all that is the
mistake like like this person having their experience even though there's
one at one awareness there's there's this window and there's that window well like
all I can know is is this window I don't even know if there is any other window I
don't know I guess I'm not how much how many windows have you looked out of during your life
in other words how many perceptions have you had in your life do you think infinite an infinite
number is it your experience that that infinite number have of perceptions have been perceived
by the same awareness yes so it is your experience that the same awareness can experience an infinite
number of perceptions in time yes and the fact that you can't remember all of those perceptions
now doesn't imply it doesn't prove Alette or even imply that those perceptions didn't take place in
the same awareness yeah yeah now why couldn't exactly the same thing be true of an infinite
number of perceptions that are now taking place in space the fact that you cannot see all of
those perceptions doesn't prove or even imply that they are taking in different awarenesses
yes but it can't it doesn't disapprove it that's true yeah but if you don't believe
in pink elephants because you've never seen one yeah so it would be strange to believe in pink
elephants in spite of the fact that you've never seen one wouldn't it yeah wouldn't the fact that
you've never seen one isn't the proof that they don't exist yeah we can't prove that they don't
exist all we can say is I've never experienced one but if you had to choose whether to believe
in pink elephants or not wouldn't it be better to presume that they don't exist until you find one
rather than presume that they do now you have never found a limit to your awareness you have
never experienced it it's right to awareness you have never experienced it coming and going
it's the same awareness that knows an infinite number of thoughts and perceptions all those
thoughts and perceptions are limited but the awareness with which they are known knows no
limit in itself wouldn't it be better to presume that awareness doesn't have a limit and to base
your life on that experience what all of us do if we're honest we look at awareness and
we realize it has no limits and yet strangely we make this leap of faith and we presume that
it does and we lead our life on that basis we think feel act perceive and relate on behalf
of a temporary limited awareness although we've never found one why not stick to your experience
why not think feel perceive and relate on behalf of unlimited ever-present awareness and see how
that changes your experience it is the it is the response you get in your experience that
is the proof or otherwise of that possibility it comes it comes in your experience it doesn't
come as an intellect your proof it can later be rationalized but even if the Buddha himself was to
turn up and tell you that awareness was infinite and unlimited at best you would believe him it's
you have to go by your own experience stick to your own experience if you've never seen a limit
in awareness don't presume one and try to lead your life in a way that is consistent with that
understanding or with even with that possibility first of all think in a way that is consistent
with that possibility and then take that thinking more deeply into your experience feel in a way
that is consistent with that possibility and then take this feeling out into the world to
the way you act perceive and relate and see how experience responds to you when you respond to
it from this point of view it is that response that is the confirmation or otherwise thank you
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)