Does nothingness really exist?

[Owledge]

Ok, this is supposed to be playful. I think it might be an interesting mind game to ask this:

Could it be possible that the mind, during spiritual experiences, still objectifies too much, too early? That it will believe that there is something 'higher' or 'beyond', when at that point it was all just the mind messing with itself, just a rewiring of the brain's processes? I know this still would not explain the ungraspable idea of infinity, but here are my relatively unrefined thoughts that I wrote down:

 

If you go on a quest for something that does not exist, you will, eventually, arrive at where you started. And in people's so-called spiritual experiences where they talk about how they perceived the source of everything, or nothingness, or oneness, maybe they simply didn't find what they were looking for, because it doesn't exist, so that gives total affirmation of the situation where they began the journey.

Do you know the movie "The Silent Flute" / "Circle of Iron"? It was to a great degree written by Bruce Lee. The protagonist, at the end of his long quest for enlightenment, opened a book and was looking into a mirror, seeing himself.

 

Isn't all spiritual search based on a feeling of dissatisfaction with how the own life is perceived? And doesn't the search eventually lead to more satisfaction with life? How could it be any different, if this search only points at life itself?

Isn't everybody eventually getting their personal version of what they are looking for? If you are eventually happy because you believe you have transcended the suffering that is life, doesn't that require you to affirm life, since transcending something needs a reference to what it is that is being transcended?

My experiences with ayahuasca made me wonder about these things, since it is so well-known that the brew always gives you what you need at that moment and that it's almost like you talking to yourself, giving you advice on how to proceed. It's as if you explore what else there is, and you get an answer colored in your personal belief system, but the message is the same for everybody. If there was anything except life, wouldn't experiencing that further affirm your discontentment with life instead of the opposite? Isn't it the greatest (most powerful) help with the troubles of life to realize that there is no alternative?

 

Maybe these words can inspire some novel thought.

If not... who cares?

[Fū Yue]

Once, I had a dream. I had suddenly become aware while watching these nonsense figures doing a little dance. It all struck me as so pointless, so I asked the dream 'what is this supposed to mean?' No response. 'What am I?' No response. OK. That's fine. 'So what is this?'

 

I fell through the dream into a bright, tingling light and it responded with a simple 'life, and it is beautiful'.

[Owledge]

I so much agree.

Although silly dancing is an easy one. Misery and decay is a beauty less easy to recognize.

[Birch]

I suppose it depends from what POV you see the nothingness. I'd call that in as "human free will".

What I'm slowly getting on board with is that "Life" has it's ways that don't require I do anything. Saying it's something or nothing seems superfluous at this point.

 

---opinion etc---

[idiot_stimpy]

Once, I had a dream. I had suddenly become aware while watching these nonsense figures doing a little dance. It all struck me as so pointless, so I asked the dream 'what is this supposed to mean?' No response. 'What am I?' No response. OK. That's fine. 'So what is this?'

 

I fell through the dream into a bright, tingling light and it responded with a simple 'life, and it is beautiful'.

 

 

nice one

[idiot_stimpy]

What is space

[RiverSnake]

Look up into the sky at night...in between the stars and planets all i see is infinite nothingness?

 

-My 2 cent, Peace

[Lucky7Strikes]

Ok, this is supposed to be playful. I think it might be an interesting mind game to ask this:

Could it be possible that the mind, during spiritual experiences, still objectifies too much, too early? That it will believe that there is something 'higher' or 'beyond', when at that point it was all just the mind messing with itself, just a rewiring of the brain's processes? I know this still would not explain the ungraspable idea of infinity, but here are my relatively unrefined thoughts that I wrote down:

 

If you go on a quest for something that does not exist, you will, eventually, arrive at where you started. And in people's so-called spiritual experiences where they talk about how they perceived the source of everything, or nothingness, or oneness, maybe they simply didn't find what they were looking for, because it doesn't exist, so that gives total affirmation of the situation where they began the journey.

Do you know the movie "The Silent Flute" / "Circle of Iron"? It was to a great degree written by Bruce Lee. The protagonist, at the end of his long quest for enlightenment, opened a book and was looking into a mirror, seeing himself.

 

Isn't all spiritual search based on a feeling of dissatisfaction with how the own life is perceived? And doesn't the search eventually lead to more satisfaction with life? How could it be any different, if this search only points at life itself?

Isn't everybody eventually getting their personal version of what they are looking for? If you are eventually happy because you believe you have transcended the suffering that is life, doesn't that require you to affirm life, since transcending something needs a reference to what it is that is being transcended?

My experiences with ayahuasca made me wonder about these things, since it is so well-known that the brew always gives you what you need at that moment and that it's almost like you talking to yourself, giving you advice on how to proceed. It's as if you explore what else there is, and you get an answer colored in your personal belief system, but the message is the same for everybody. If there was anything except life, wouldn't experiencing that further affirm your discontentment with life instead of the opposite? Isn't it the greatest (most powerful) help with the troubles of life to realize that there is no alternative?

 

Maybe these words can inspire some novel thought.

If not... who cares?

Scattered rhetorical questions everywhere!

[64changes]

No.

It cant.

 

If it exists, its something.

 

 

Quoting Douglas Adams:

God: I refuse to prove I exist, because proof denies faith, and without faith, I am nothing.

Man: Ah, but what about the Babel Fish, its a dead giveaway, isn't it?

God: Oh, I hadn't thought of that.

And God promptly disappeared in a puff of logic.

 

Man, pleased with his earlier success then went on to prove that Black is white.

And got himself run over on the next zebra crossing.

Edited April 13, 2012 by 64changes

[Thunder_Gooch]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_particle

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation

 

According to Stephen Hawking, At the edge of a black hole which is known as the event horizon, the gravity is so strong it breaks apart a virtual particle pair, and sucks in the anti particle, which slowly eats away at the black hole, and it releases the regular particle back into the universe. Eventually the black hole will evaporate and cease to be.

 

 

If you can take nothing, and split it into matter and anti matter, then it really isn't nothing now is it?

 

Basically my current understanding of physics is that if you have a strong enough negative energy field (gravity so strong it is like the event horizon of a black hole), you can create both matter and antimatter from nothing because it isn't nothing, its full of virtual particle pairs, if you combine matter and anti matter you will see an explosion of positive energy equal to the amount of negative energy needed to create them in the first place.

Edited April 13, 2012 by More_Pie_Guy

[Mokona]

Ok, this is supposed to be playful. I think it might be an interesting mind game to ask this:

Could it be possible that the mind, during spiritual experiences, still objectifies too much, too early? That it will believe that there is something 'higher' or 'beyond', when at that point it was all just the mind messing with itself, just a rewiring of the brain's processes? I know this still would not explain the ungraspable idea of infinity, but here are my relatively unrefined thoughts that I wrote down:

 

If you go on a quest for something that does not exist, you will, eventually, arrive at where you started. And in people's so-called spiritual experiences where they talk about how they perceived the source of everything, or nothingness, or oneness, maybe they simply didn't find what they were looking for, because it doesn't exist, so that gives total affirmation of the situation where they began the journey.

Do you know the movie "The Silent Flute" / "Circle of Iron"? It was to a great degree written by Bruce Lee. The protagonist, at the end of his long quest for enlightenment, opened a book and was looking into a mirror, seeing himself.

 

Isn't all spiritual search based on a feeling of dissatisfaction with how the own life is perceived? And doesn't the search eventually lead to more satisfaction with life? How could it be any different, if this search only points at life itself?

Isn't everybody eventually getting their personal version of what they are looking for? If you are eventually happy because you believe you have transcended the suffering that is life, doesn't that require you to affirm life, since transcending something needs a reference to what it is that is being transcended?

My experiences with ayahuasca made me wonder about these things, since it is so well-known that the brew always gives you what you need at that moment and that it's almost like you talking to yourself, giving you advice on how to proceed. It's as if you explore what else there is, and you get an answer colored in your personal belief system, but the message is the same for everybody. If there was anything except life, wouldn't experiencing that further affirm your discontentment with life instead of the opposite? Isn't it the greatest (most powerful) help with the troubles of life to realize that there is no alternative?

 

Maybe these words can inspire some novel thought.

If not... who cares?

Interesting*

 

Isn't all spiritual search based on a feeling of dissatisfaction with how the own life is perceived? And doesn't the search eventually lead to more satisfaction with life? How could it be any different, if this search only points at life itself?

 

I read that we wear masks, these masks are our socially learned selves and normally are motivated by negetive factors unless said person is abnormally well adjusted. Like the driving reason to get married being becuase a person is afriad of being alone, or excersises becuase he/she likes to have the strength to push others around.

 

The interesting thing (That I will attest to) during meditation some (if not eventually all) of these attitudes show themselves in some form or another, and if we are strong enough(or want to strongly enough) can be changed to positive motivating factors.

 

The protagonist, at the end of his long quest for enlightenment, opened a book and was looking into a mirror, seeing himself.

 

I'm of a different sort, feeling that enlightenment is biological and much, much less mental -therefore, seeing yourself in a mirror only means to me: "I" am the one who needs to put the work in to make those biological changes in attitude and energy that will result in the Greater Kan and Li, and Enlightenment.

 

If you go on a quest for something that does not exist, you will, eventually, arrive at where you started. And in people's so-called spiritual experiences where they talk about how they perceived the source of everything, or nothingness, or oneness, maybe they simply didn't find what they were looking for, because it doesn't exist, so that gives total affirmation of the situation where they began the journey.

 

It's a hard thing to put yourself in someone else's shoes. I feel that this piece fails at it's intended meaning becuase the end goal, or what is percieved as the "end" is different for everyone. Not everyone makes a circular journey. Per example, I see my own path as continuous, but not recycling, unless you count the fact that the basic skills learned at the beginning are used, forever - as they are the jumping platform to progress.

 

..Could it be possible that the mind, during spiritual experiences, still objectifies too much, too early? That it will believe that there is something 'higher' or 'beyond', when at that point it was all just the mind messing with itself, just a rewiring of the brain's processes? I know this still would not explain the ungraspable idea of infinity..

 

Whatever the mind may be doing, or not doing it is still possible to clarify and learn for certainty through simple experimentation. Some Siddhis arise that allow for pyschic exploration and understanding of some states and 'higher or beyond' experiences that are repeatable, and possible of being shared to a lesser extent to those who haven't developed the skill. Examples can be akin to the quest to learn if Qi really exists. As a life example - I learned how to use the Qi of others through proving to myself it worked by sending what I had built through meditation to others. It came to the point I could take a relaxed individual, and clear out the qi strongly enough to cause massive spikes in positive thinking and physical ability. It felt good to have confirmation.

 

Then to pinpoint "Beyond, Infinity and whatnot" There seem to be both energetic structures and biological states that allow those sorts of things to be experienced. Not everyone develops those structures, or ends up in those biological states, but sometimes touch on them by injesting certain drugs or plants. Again though, it has been my experience that without some of those energetic structures that develop in and above the head some of these states will not be attainable anyway.

 

I'm not a very eloquent writer so I hope my opinions made sense. They are only opinions based on my experience, too. I'm sure what i've written sounds ludicrious to many.

[三江源]

That circle.. is actually a spiral.

[Owledge]

That circle.. is actually a spiral.

You can believe that out of a first impression and then still go in circles for all your life. My mind isn't easily fooled. (That can be a blessing and a curse I guess.)

Edited April 13, 2012 by Owledge

[三江源]

You can believe that out of a first impression and then still go in circles for all your life. My mind isn't easily fooled. (That can be a blessing and a curse I guess.)

 

ha, Owledge.

 

I'm sure my mind is easily fooled. Interested indeed to know : how are you sure yours isnt?!

 

(The spiral is an experience, btw.)

[Owledge]

Difficult to explain, but I will try:

For me, the solid has to support the subtle, if the subtle is based on it. When you talk about geometric forms, then that picture contains circles and additional forms that easily escape the attention which create the false impression that the picture shows a spiral. Of course that impression is a reality, but people sometimes confuse impression and material reality, and it is very useful that I don't so easily.

Darren Brown shows how useful that skill can be in our world.

That picture also shows us that there is a difference between our senses and our mind, and even our mind is separated. One part says there is a spiral, another part keeps examining and figures out that it's circles.

 

You know, in an unconventional way, I have done a lot of awareness meditation.

Edited April 13, 2012 by Owledge

[Thunder_Gooch]

http://www.amazon.com/Universe-Nothing-There-Something-Rather/dp/145162445X/

[goldisheavy]

Ok, this is supposed to be playful. I think it might be an interesting mind game to ask this:

Could it be possible that the mind, during spiritual experiences, still objectifies too much, too early? That it will believe that there is something 'higher' or 'beyond', when at that point it was all just the mind messing with itself, just a rewiring of the brain's processes?

 

The mind is not the brain. The two are not identical. Physicalists naturally assume the brain to be identical to mind, because that's what their philosophical doctrine preaches. That doesn't mean physicalism is correct. Nor does it mean all spiritual people are physicalists who naturally agree with this sort of language.

 

I know this still would not explain the ungraspable idea of infinity, but here are my relatively unrefined thoughts that I wrote down:

 

If you go on a quest for something that does not exist, you will, eventually, arrive at where you started.

 

Or it does exist, you'll never be the same again. Or if not never, then not very soon. Not in a trillion years.

 

And in people's so-called spiritual experiences where they talk about how they perceived the source of everything, or nothingness, or oneness, maybe they simply didn't find what they were looking for, because it doesn't exist, so that gives total affirmation of the situation where they began the journey.

 

The best way to answer this is to have one of those experiences yourself. It's not as simple as you try to paint it. It's not your neat little caricature. It's not merely a non-finding of whatever we were searching for. It's none of those things. These experiences are somewhat individual and unique. There might be similarities, but no two are completely alike. People find meaning and understanding in many such spiritual experiences. It's not just non-finding. It's more like a different kind of finding.

 

When you walk into an empty room, is it a non-finding of a table that isn't there? Or is a finding of a usable space? If you discover you can move your arms around, is that a finding of freedom of movement, or is it a non-finding of a straight jacket?

 

Spiritual experiences do not contain all meaning. Nor do they bring all understanding. Just like one flash of light may not be enough to understand the total contents of a dark room. It requires more light, more time, more reflection, some experimenting with the room's contents, etc. These experiences are valuable, even if they are not the end all be all of spirituality. They are not merely various types of non-findings. The best way to show that is for you to have one or ten such experiences for yourself. Preferably without the aid of drugs too, if you can swing it. (That way you won't have an easy way of associating the experience with some external power, like that of an external drug, you'll know it as internal and you'll be forced to deal with it without dismissing blithely as "meh, it's just the drug playing with my neurons" bullshit.)

 

Do you know the movie "The Silent Flute" / "Circle of Iron"? It was to a great degree written by Bruce Lee. The protagonist, at the end of his long quest for enlightenment, opened a book and was looking into a mirror, seeing himself.

 

Isn't all spiritual search based on a feeling of dissatisfaction with how the own life is perceived?

 

Yes.

 

And doesn't the search eventually lead to more satisfaction with life? How could it be any different, if this search only points at life itself?

 

That's too abstract. Life is so broad, so vast, it encompasses everything, even what is currently inconceivable. So that's not very helpful. People want something more specific and less abstract. For example, if you want to develop supernormal powers, that's not just looking for life. That's a rather specific goal. If you want more wisdom, more understanding of phenomena and the relativity of meanings, again, that's not just life, that's more specific and more directed than that. For some people satisfaction is spending every day in a maximally hedonistic state. For others it's torturing oneself every day because of some belief that suffering will reveal some kind of truth later on. What is satisfaction? It depends on your aims, and on the context within which those aims make sense.

 

So I agree with you here, but the problem is, you're not saying anything. What you're saying is so vague, as to almost mean nothing. Yes, it all starts and comes back to life, sure. But how is that helpful? There are so many different ways of living. For example, you can live as a bodiless being in a formless realm. Isn't that surprising to you? Is that just life for you? Do you even care?

 

Isn't everybody eventually getting their personal version of what they are looking for? If you are eventually happy because you believe you have transcended the suffering that is life, doesn't that require you to affirm life, since transcending something needs a reference to what it is that is being transcended?

 

I don't understand this. It's as if we are failing to affirm life, but somehow, later on, we are forced to affirm it. I don't get it. Where do you get this idea that spiritual people reject life, so that later on they are somehow forced to affirm it, as if almost grudgingly? Seems crazy to me.

 

My experiences with ayahuasca made me wonder about these things, since it is so well-known that the brew always gives you what you need at that moment and that it's almost like you talking to yourself, giving you advice on how to proceed. It's as if you explore what else there is, and you get an answer colored in your personal belief system, but the message is the same for everybody. If there was anything except life, wouldn't experiencing that further affirm your discontentment with life instead of the opposite? Isn't it the greatest (most powerful) help with the troubles of life to realize that there is no alternative?

 

Maybe these words can inspire some novel thought.

If not... who cares?

 

Life is all there is. But life can take an infinitude of forms. You can have different feelings in life. Life can have different flavor. Life can be peaceful or turbulent. It can be empowered and empowering, or you can have a life of a victim. Life can be mysterious or mundane. Life can be confined to a spacial location, or not thus confined. Life can occur within linear time or it can flow outside time. Worms live in a way that's different from birds and fish. To lump all this with one word, "life" is like to be blind.

 

All ways of living are interrelated, but there are still appreciable differences. For example, would you want to live all your life as a victim? As someone who must follow the circumstances at every turn, without any personal say in any important matter?

Edited April 17, 2012 by goldisheavy

[Owledge]

The mind is not the brain. The two are not identical. Physicalists naturally assume the brain to be identical to mind, because that's what their philosophical doctrine preaches. That doesn't mean physicalism is correct. Nor does it mean all spiritual people are physicalists who naturally agree with this sort of language.

That evades the question. I didn't equal the mind to the brain, but brain function can alter the mind's perceptions and thus experiences.

 

...The best way to show that is for you to have one or ten such experiences for yourself. Preferably without the aid of drugs too, if you can swing it. (That way you won't have an easy way of associating the experience with some external power, like that of an external drug, you'll know it as internal and you'll be forced to deal with it without dismissing blithely as "meh, it's just the drug playing with my neurons" bullshit.)

Well, whether external or internal cause, in both cases it can be 'dismissed' as fiddling with brain processes. If done without drugs, the cause is intention. (Shortly after my ayahuasca experience, I could almost recreate the experience of timelessness and external illusion by merely re-imagining the experience.)