Search the Community

When you look closely you'll see that thought comes out of nothingness and dissolves into nothingness. Thought only exists for the concious moment in which you experience it. Something can not happen to you unconsciously, because then it wouldn't happen. What would the intention for a thought be but another thought? The intention of all thoughts is to experience thinking

It happened to me by accident, I somehow managed to enter an experience of nothingness when I was waking up from sleep. I heard there are meditation techniques you can try. They call the state "turiya" in Hindu philosophy, if that helps. Like you said before, nothing = something. So something coming out of nothing is the same as nothing coming out of something. I think you've slightly misunderstood. The source of everything is not a state of nothingness, or turiya. The source of everything is actually itself, which is what is meant by "nothing is the source of everything". Things don't need a source. It's a strange loop. What is stopping consciousness from creating without a source? Nothing is, lol. It creates out of nothing, like magic. No method or mechanism needed. It just is itself. When you're eating a pizza, that pizza actually came from nowhere, you're just imagining that it came from some pizza place. The problem with looking for a "source" is that it turns into an infinite regression. What created that source? and what created the source that created that source? And so on forever.

@Osaid yeah, i get that. I'm aware of that pure nothingness presence in a certain level like intuitively but how can one be directly conscious of this conciousness. So "mind" bending! Correct me if I'm wrong but, it said like nothing is the source for everything. If this is the nothing which is the source for everything, how non-duality is possible?

Sounds like what I mean by true awareness for most part, but it is not what I would imply as Nothingness.

I assume you're talking about the experience of pure consciousness (AKA turiya or nothingness as people like to call it) Yes, it is possible to experience nothing, as paradoxical as it sounds. The experience is a paradox because the finite mind cannot comprehend "experience" and "nothing" co-existing, since it has created a duality between the two. It is a state of consciousness where there is no object for the finite mind to grasp at, an absence of objects. It is completely impossible to imagine BTW, because your mind is finite and can only know finite things, whereas nothingness is infinite and without end. It's like trying to imagine what having no eyesight is like, it's just absent. There is the experience of it being absent. You don't see black, you don't see any colors, it's just completely gone. That's what nothingness is like, but your entire reality is gone along with your eyesight, and you just exist there. You are actually experiencing nothingness right now, to a certain degree, but you just don't realize it since you're so fixated on the finite portion of reality. Try to focus on the fact that you cannot see what is behind your head. You are having the experience of being unable to see what is behind your head. This is actually an experience of nothingness. You are experiencing the lack or non-existence of a certain sensation, which is sight. You can't see anything behind you. There is essentially nothing there until you turn around and look at it. Try to feel into that. This is probably the closest you can get to understanding nothingness without going into a full state of nothingness.

Nothingness is not nothing, it is simply something you can't really put in words or even make concept of , because it is beyond our logical capacity.

Don't know where to start - but this is actually everything a spiritual seeker must know: How to raise ones frequency of consciousness (or in other words) minimize the radius of the self-refernce circuit. So what do I exactly mean by that? Given the assumptiom that everything is one / you are everything/ there is only that, the only way to interact with so-called reality is by yourself/ through yourself/ with yourself. So you are seer/ seeing / seen, subject/ process/ object, receiver/ medium/ information, these triads are closed circuits. When identification happens, the triad apparently splits apart. Let's try to find a metaphora for it even though it's just a fairy tale of course: Imagine "you" are sitting in a train and watch the train tracks. Your look is statically focused into nothing (particular), you watch the train tracks passing by forever and ever. In this state you are completely one with the scene. There is no mind, no body. Just "train tracks passing by" is happening. You are not really in the train, you actually are the train, the process of watching and the train tracks itself. Nothing complicated here. Then, one day, a thought arises like: "What am I (actually made of)? What does a single rail actually look like?" And then your look clings to a single rail. You turn your eyes to see how it is falling behind, and then it's out of your sight again. But this was not a fullfilling answer to your question, since you couldn't see all the details of the rail and the moment you could examine its properties, it disappeared again. So your look clings to the next rail and so on and so on. Every rail you examine first lets you hope and makes you excited to get the answer to your question, but then you mourn after it the next second, leaving you with more questions than before. Your eyes are in constant motion, from one rail to another. Relentlessly, your restless soul longs for the answer, since you apparently lost the selfknowledge. A subtle memory of the natural relaxed state of "train tracks passing by" rests in the depth of your being, but you project this state into the future. You can only imagine to rest like this after finding the answer to your question. You cling to the rails, but they are sooo fleeting. Then you suddenly recognize that there is something which is always present during your desperate search for the answer. Even though the rails appear and disappear and your eyes constantly move, there something subtle ("within your awarenes" - not really ) which is still the whole time. You try all the methods to concentrate on that again, which is constantly here, not fleeting. In the end, they all have the same goal: raising the frequency of your eyes moving back to the "statically focused into nothing (particular)" - state. Minimizing the distance between the old rail (the past) and the present one, so that your eyes can rest instead of constantly shifting from one place to another. Means: raising the frequency of your consciuosness, minimizing the radius of the self-reference circuit. Here are some examples: Neti neti: Realizing you are neither this trail, nor that one - makes your look relax into the natural state since the rails become less and less important Self inquriy: By zooming out and turning inward, you realize that the rails don't define your being, your eyes stop focusing on something far out there which is rushing by, but focus closer and closer to yourself - the focuspoint transitioning distance becomes shorter and shorter Letting go/doing nothing: Your eyes just relax, you stop energetically clinging to the rails Breathing meditation/body awareness: Instead of being imersed in the looking, you relax into what is - not trying to solve the riddle, but let your body find its natural energetc equilibrium Being present: You stop clinging to past rails - everytime you remember clinging to a past rail you naturally shift back to the present one All these techniques shorten the distance of switching your focus from one rail to another, and try to bring it back into the natural relaxed state, the energetc equilibirum, which is the state of the least resistance. The shorter the distance between two focus points (the smaller the radius of the self-reference circuit), the higher the frequency of consciousness (frequency of being in the present moment). "Enlighenment" is the natural state of least resistance, which was there in the beginning, when you didn't identify with the rails. It's the closed circuit of the triad. Of course, there actually is only enlightenment, because you were/are present all the time, only your eyes were not as relaxed as they could be. So being completely present kind of equals an infinite frequency of consciousness - and this is perfect nothingness/silence etc. What do I mean by that? Imagine a beat every time you focus back on the present - At the beginning of your spiritual journey it occours quite seldom, slowly raising its frquency. Then it slowly turns from single beats into a clear tone - moving up the ladder through all the octaves. Since then you still have the feeling of being in a journey of raising your frequency - until it becomes such a high pitch that you can't hear it anymore - complete silence, stillness. I could write more about what I mean by minimizing the radius of the self-reference circuit, giving other metaphoras like a planet (object) flying around a star (subject) until both collapse into each other when the rotation frequency hits its maximum. But I think this text can be enough for you to realign again with what your highest goal is. Remember - there is only the present moment to focus back on the NOW. Don't attach to this moment, since it is fleeting. Don't stay in the present moment (which is impossible since now it is not the present moment anymore), stay in the NOW. Realign your focus over and over again, every time you recognize that clinging to a moment happens. Your frequency of consciousness will raise, which soon will be recognizable. Then you will realize that there is nobody and no situation that could ever disturb you in your meditation. That you don't meditate by closing eyes and sitting with straight back. You then will meditate while eating and shitting. You can meditate RIGHT NOW, just come back here and now again. What is real/true NOW? Who are YOU? Don't project the answer into the future, don't lose yourself in thoughts (rails), just come back to what already is the case - eternally NOW.

I hit the essence of it. The emptiness and nothingness which carved my womb, and historically runs in my life story. It should have been obvious to me that this was it. Oh Allah, you were but another whacky element in my mental wonderland. I remember staring at my ceiling, thinking how terrifying an existence of forever in heaven would be. And then when I was still in Pakistan and realised I was an atheist, true emptiness and nothingness flooded over. Why am I here? Why is there something rather than nothing? WHY IS THERE SOMETHING RATHER THAN NOTHING!? _ Emptiness and nothingness, emptiness and nothingness. An indescribable mental state with no words. Dancing phantoms and ephemeral shapeshifting entities. The unconscious is boundless in contents. Myriads of flashing colours, figures of dark and light, sinister and angelic, all holding hands in a circle, laughing, crying, dancing, twisting, arising, passing ; all by nothingness and of nothingness. Nothing but nothingness ; a terrible terrible solitude, as ghosts and phantoms of all dimensions and colours torture me in jest ^ Mark Twain, The Mysterious Stranger --- I now realise even more strongly how much I value this video game. The crystallisation of what I feel, Zelda Majoras Mask. The analogy and symbolism everywhere. And this deeply, deeply chilling and beautiful nostalgic song. Through listening to this song, the floodgates to my unconscious are opened When I hear this song, free form words, stories and images just naturally form. "Active imagination" is the technique they call it, I should do it more. It feels right for me

I dislike that Tony Parsons, Jim Newman and the rest of the so called radical non dualists focuses on the individual even though it doesn't exist. The whole point in the message is that there is nothing here for the individual, but why all the talk about this non existent individual and what it does in it's illusory dream then? This seems to create more tension than it releases, it makes it seem like there is someone that needs to be gotten rid off when there isn't. When I hear a message from nothingness directed towards me as nothingness it seems to resonate more. It is more direct, less descriptive and more energetic. It doesn't even recognise an individual, it is source talking directly to source with an absolute trust that source hears source. It doesn't need to explain how the individual doesn't exist and how this can't be understood and what not, it just knows that intuitively already. What I've also noticed with Jim and Tony is that I'm sort of conditioned to reject or not listen to other messages from so called "teachers", because "they" teach personal teachings. Many of the teachers they say teach personal teachings are in my estimation not personal teachings though. The personal pronouns they use aren't directed towards a person but to the underlying essence that is the mystery of all appearances. Lil rant Lemme hear ur thoughts

I am a hole of nothingness, without quality, that in some incomprehensible way, is pretending to have a shape

Nothingness is larger than imagination/consciousness. Nothing = Everything. You do the math.

I have had the experience with thinking who is behind the eyes too. It went to a point, I felt literally gone and that I was an infinite nothingness behind my eyes from where I look from. Strange daily experiences for me would be like: Looking in the mirror and not feeling it's me. Just some body. I really find it handsome though. Every now and then the 'lucidity' pops up. Where I am suddenly lucid of reality and am like, "What". It happens multiple times a day. I consider it as practice and try to pop it up whenever I can.

@Leo Gura I appreciate your answers. When you say Let's make an analogy. Let's say I spend years looking at clouds non stop. For fun I "see" or interpret things out of the clouds, like here's a lion, here's a cat, etc. What you are saying amounts to saying "all those things are just clouds!" which makes total sense. I'm just so used to my stories in the clouds that I forgot I'm looking at clouds. My problem, and my question, is how can one interpret stuff without the clouds? Can you start interpreting and seeing shapes out of a totally blank sheet? When you say "you can't stop something from coming out of nothing", I see how this statement is not totally correct. I would personally prefer "interpretation is always possible". There's infinitely many ways to look at the clouds and there's infinitely many ways to interpret nothingness into life. Many things are still unclear, but thank you for the answers.

Have you actually verified this? Because as true as this may be, the problem I see with the Ego, is that even when you realise No Self the ego still remains. I mean even if you awaken to nothingness, you will eventually come back to the ego. So how do we permanently fix this? Is it even possible, because as long as we are in human form we have needs and when these needs aren't met, we aren't "happy". Thanks brother

Hey everyone, I'll write down my insights on happiness following this, please read and point out any holes, loops and places I missed to explore. Tell me where I can go deeper, and just your insight on happiness in general. Thank you. I feel that Happiness is deep satisfaction that lasts. The feeling of being whole and complete. When you feel that you need nothing to complete you. When all your needs vanish, and you are truly ready to die. Really freedom = Happiness = Love. Then what prevents us from being happy? Worries and Wants. Why do we worry? Because of our desire to maintain, which is the same as attachment. We have the desire to maintain, because we fear the collapse of whatever we are trying to maintain. Collapse into what? Into pure nothingness, pure potential, infinity, death. We are scared to die. I think to stop this fear, we will need to realize, we are which we fear collapsing into, the pure nothingness, pure potential, infinity. Why do we want? Because we want to feel complete and whole. Well, that's an assumption that we aren't actually complete and whole. Let's question that too and test the assumption. Am I actually not complete and whole? Well, to question that, I need to know who I am first. And well, turns out, I am the pure nothingness, pure potential, infinity. Which means I am actually complete and whole. So complete and whole that I contain the non-complete and non-whole. Assumption was wrong. Therefore, there is no need to want. And you are truly free for the first time. So, true Happiness and actual freedom comes from realizing our true nature. Who would have guessed. Took me a whole 1.5 hours of contemplating and running into loops to come to a conclusion that I have been told the whole fucking time.

You're confusing states of nothingness with states of unconsciousness. When you're sleeping, you're unconscious of the passing events, like a rock on the side of the road.

First of all I'm newbie to enlightenment and Consciousness so these are my questions about conciousness. Okay seems silly, but i don't grasp it. If Consciousness alone exists how can i go to be in the state of nothing and suddenly time or events passed by? Yes I'm not denying it all occured in conciousness but how the events passed when I'm(conciousness) is in the state of nothing. Example :- Sleep, why and how time just passed by, when nothingness existed and howcome events happened in that time period.

For me the problem is that with meditation it is impossible for me to get close to the tearing of the veil that occurs with psychedelics, even in low doses. Lately I've seen the need to meditate as much as possible, partly for pleasure, partly to get deeper, but if I stop doing psychedelics for a while, my mind starts to buzz with questions and there's no way to stop it. a small dose of 5 meo sometimes and a momentary glance at the nothingness that dreams that I am makes everything go back to order. I hope it is no longer necessary, but I wonder how many people really see in normal meditation that it is the infinite nothingness that is dreaming. It would be nice if it were like that every day

From the perspective of stage blue/low orange shadow in which they "pray for egoic aims" such as more money, better house etc. is it in Gods possibility to grant our egoic wishes simply by praying to him? Does God think in that manner? Lets say I wanted a better job and i prayed for it, would God respond? Would the "nothingness" respond? Is there a differnece between the two?

Whatever you can think about, infinity contains all that. If you start to get unsure about infinity, try to imagine the edge of the universe. What is outside of that edge? Nothing? What is nothing but an infinite nothingness? What is infinite nothingness but infinite potential? What is infinite potential but infinite actuality?

Infinity is nothingness. If it is not something you are imagining, it exists as Infinity or actual nothing (pure Actuality)

God = Everything/Nothing (God can not be 'known' in relative/rational/logical/dual terms... 'it' has no limits, no qualities, no 'somethingness') For 'Everything/Nothing' to 'seem like something'.. introducing... 'imaginary duality'. (by 'pretending/imagining' that 'Everything/Nothing' is not what it is (is separate from itself).. Something 'appears' (seems to be)) All 'duality/limits/qualities/description' is 'imaginary'.. and this is what 'Creation' is... the 'mechanism by which Everything/Nothing 'knows/imagines/creates' itself (Somethingness, rather than 'Everythingness/Nothingness') The Map (imagined duality/separateness) is not, and can never be 'The Territory' (non-duality/oneness), and at the same time.. it IS the territory (you, me, everything there 'is').

@Stefan Heuer I'm still wrapping my head around it too. Basically all of reality is happening in God's imagination. Even the physical world. Because of this, its not real. None of it ever happened or could possibly happen. It's nothing at all. God is having a human experience in it's own mind. Physicality only is possible because reality is infinite nothingness in the first place. The problem with science, hitting other people, is that it's all contextual and takes place within the dream. But because we have forgotten we are God, it all seems so real. It's kind of like saying "Well, if its a dream then how come all this dream stuff is happening?" I found the Book Labyrinths Of Reason's opening pages really useful. The dreamer is beyond any individual person or ego, its a universal dreamer. God has forever to do whatever. Forgetting is a virtue. God wants to explore itself and get to know itself through its limitations. How else would god experience what it's like to be mortal unless it used it's immortal power to experience that? Only an immortal could be a mortal. It's a paradox. The only thing that can be immortal is nothing. Nothing can be anything. You are experiencing a sliver of that anything nothing right now! I don't know about the multiple lives thing. Other than you actually don't live any lives. The fact that anything exists at all is hard for the materialist mind to wrap itself around. once you catch a glimpse of eternity and infinity it starts making more sense. Honestly I am still a newbie on this path.

Guys im so deeply confused about leo's teachings (like "Why brains dont exist" & "making sense of paranormal phenomena" )and there is just way too much videos for me to know where to start. In this case I cant connect teachings like: there is no self but there is also no external world(everything being a hallucination/perception) and stuff like: yes, there probably exist immaterial souls (my interpretation of leo saying we might have lived many different lifes) (video: outrageous experiments in consciousness 30 Awakenings in 30 days) and I might have lived many different lifes but after death there is only nothingness forever. What I also dont understand is how idealism should solve the mind body problem (because stuff still feels solid and my brothers or dogs body is hurt when I punch them) and I havent found much value on this forum either. Also how does besided the mindbody dualism the semantic dualism of nothing and everything collapse? And how is the dualism of my perspective of planet earth versus my brothers perspective of planet earth collapse? Also what does general & special theory of relativity and Quantum Electro Dynamics mean for my thoughts, my actions and the following linear consequences like my mothers, the planet earth's (The fossil record tells us that life on Earth has lasted at least 3.5 billion years ->implies science has taken measurments of the external world and predictions say that in 2 billion years our ocean will be boiling due to the swelling of our sun) or my death? Also I recently took an MRI-Scan, Shouldnt this prove the existance of my skull on planet earth? Can someone give me a model of reality, the world, humans and myself including this empitness/void/nothingness everyone is talking about and also explain me the here stated paradoxes? Please be very concrete if possible, 90 % of the stuff I read here I dont really understand. You'd be my hero. THanks in adavance

I do not deny the existence of preferences. Because, preference is the very nature of being - but within these, there are further dualities, with boundaries, however imaginary, that can be ascertained to a degree, according to the levels of your perception --- and these are pushing you towards something that you are inadvertently attached to. The key point here being - comprehending the nature of the intricate dualities of the concept of preference. An 'indifferent existence' is an oxymoron. It cannot, and will never exist together. Existence can never be indifferent - it can masquerade as that, in an illusory form, hidden underneath some sort of deeper, and most probably, egoic manifestation - giving an idea that you are being indifferent - where in reality, you just aren't, and never can. As you said, total indifference cannot exist beyond concept, and therefore, is not a pre-requisite to this discussion, altogether. Did watch the video, and it does stress upon the point that I tried to put forth, ab initio - Leo talks about something called the 'Emergent Phenomenon' - that the randomness coincides with the non-randomness, too - there is a complex order to it, and variations do tend to have a very real effect. The point with the free will debate is not that people become hopeless (hint: egoic love for self, and the consequent loss of it masquerading as indifference), but that people comprehend the nature of ego and Nothingness, in the first place. This was one of Leo's first few videos on such topics, and what he is trying to say, in facile terms, is that it's all God - and that free will requires the acceptance and realization that it is all Oneness - and there's nothing quite outside you - for Everything is you, and you are a product and the manufacturer of it. That, an 'I' is not solely responsible for all that happens to 'themselves', because in the greater picture, 'I' work in tandem with the vastness, unbeknownst to my egoic self that strives for rigorous separation. He talks about these 37 trillion cells working for us, and not the egoic 'I' - and that is what it is - there is something working, that is not so arbitrary. We cannot shun it by saying that nothing makes sense, because quite evidently, there is some sort of meaning that we are able to give. Moreover, one cannot give meaning to things that do not make sense - the meaning and the cohesiveness of a certain thing have an inter-dependent relationship. He gives the example of being seated in a car, and realizing that you have no control since you are not the one steering the vehicle towards its destination - the idea behind this is that while you may realize that your illusion of control has been broken, it doesn't completely erase the fact that you are in a car, and are actually going somewhere. Therefore, understanding the concept of free will, in my opinion, means that while I may be walking the path, it is not the 'I' that is walking the path --- but anyway, both of it does mean that the path does exist, and is being travelled upon. As Leo put it, it is the mind that constructs preferences and thereafter makes the decisions - and each decision has a consequence. With the example of Google that he gave - if just because Google considers itself an input, no matter how deceived it is, it will never cease being an output - it is a something, and the something has real functions and is striving in some regard, and will behave in a particular, predictable fashion if certain buttons are pushed. The free will debate just juggles around the concepts of ego vs surrender - but it cannot deny the existence of things and or the functions attached to them - that is, once you have realized that ego is at play, and that it likes to take all the 'credit' - you, as an enlightened being, will try to not include it in the actual play. . Preferences do have mechanical elements to it - if one needs results, they need to train and try - and that's a very coherent process of this reality, as well, that would be absurd to deny. The results are the attachment. And if something is mechanical, it works by cultivating 'practical' relationships that need to be honored for its effective completion, without which the goal will never be reached. To be honest, we are all seeking something, and that, by its very nature gives it a mechanical touch. The very concept that surrendering gives the feeling of 'power', is somewhere, in itself, a subtle sort of attachment. Now that I think of it, haha, existence is nothing but a series of infinite attachments, glued together with love or whatever we may call it - that we can just accept through becoming enlightened through empathy; nonetheless, the lack of judgement, coming back to your original question, cannot happen in this finite, human lifetime, because judgement is the very core of your existence. The path is the judgement - that requires attachment for its effective, mechanical completion - with its own set of consequences based on the levels of 'personal' conduciveness. The path has a lot of choices, which you are not making, but You are making - that cannot be completely controlled, but regulated, for components of it are mechanical, and in the human context, limited.