Search the Community

Two years ago i hade a glimps of no self, of the truth it was 3-4 seconds. It was from Leos guided meditation, and one of the most incredibile ,,evants" in my life, : I listened to this meditation 10 more times trought the year, two times it brought up some anxiety and faiting like state (a begining of a entrance in a no self state (I think). Now the meditation is not working, I cant ,,go back" or evan deeper... I know that a part of me is loging for repeting the experience but I'm trying not too... When i experienced it I was scared, and radicaly shochet that I'm littelary nothing, I wasnt ready so the ,,state" lasted very short... now I would love to feel that againg, I would evan love the fear and what not, its so amazing and interesting but that ,,nothingness isnt happening anymore" However, does anybody have a suggestion witch guided meditation to listen? Leo if you read this, maybe you have some other guided meditations? Ps. Ruper Spira is one of my favourites, but his guided meditation are very bad for me, and not working at all (the ones on youtube), it's much like just talking or explaining the same stuff like in ,,normal" videos just slower... Here is the question, he has also some guided meditations on his website that are for sale, did anybody buy those, and are the different from those that are free on youtube? (are the worth buying)

@TheEnlightenedWon 1. Do you feel like you can understand 'the seeing', god, nothingness, etc further? Or do you feel like you can't go any further. 2. Is enlightenment beyond 'the dream'? Or is it the dream? 3. relating to ^^ Why does a technique in a 'dream' like meditation or yoga effect awareness so that it goes beyond the dream? 4. Is it possible for the current perspective/state of consciousness to ever loose its understand of itself? And go back into a self, ignorant of what has been realized? Can you feel that this can happen?

So this is a working theory for me right now... I'm going to try and word it the best my little pea-sized brain can... ya'll can feel free to tell me how completely ridiculous it is, won't hurt my feelings. Ok here goes: We have been conditioned from birth to believe that we live in a world of light. If you think about it, you most likely spent the first nine months of your life in complete darkness, and not until birth do we start to experience the first rays of light and whine and cry at the sheer complexity of it. It burns our little baby eyes, and takes weeks or months to adjust. From then on we are told that this is the world, and this is all there is. That we should always seek the light and fear darkness. It becomes our reality, and we have little control over that belief (at first). But it couldn't be further from the truth. In fact, we live in nothingness. We are nothingness. Our eyes deceive us, and bind our consciousness to this plane, which is ruled by light. But it is not our home. We are merely seeing through an avatar, which happens to be stuck on earth at the moment. We are tricked into thinking that we are the avatar. An avatar that lives in a world of light. One that needs food, water, and air to survive. Although, this is true for the avatar, and of course it will die without those things, the trick is realizing that this is not you. You are eternal. You are infinite. You have never had a beginning, or an end. And your true home is nothingness. And you can experience this right now. Close your eyes, or better yet go into a completely dark room and sit. Already you are one step closer to experiencing the true reality. Nothingness. Blank. Cut off from the lie that is light. Sit very still and try not to move. Then ask yourself: where are you? Are you still in the same reality you were in only minutes before? Go ahead and check. Touch your arm. Yes, the avatar is still there. It did not dissolve just because the light is gone. But wait, you aren't the avatar, right?. You aren't the body. Return to a comfortable position and remain still once more. If you are in a pitch-black room, open your eyes. Look all around without moving your head. You will notice it is all the same. Without light, your eyes are no longer being lied to. They have nothing to rest on. Nothing to perpetuate the deception. If you close your eyes again, you will notice that there is absolutely no difference in perception. Only an avatar following orders. The darkness remains constant, eyes open or closed. Now try to detach yourself from the belief that you live in a world of light. For beginners this may take practice, but over time it should become easier. Become a tiny speck in the darkness. Move through the darkness. Try to move what would be 5 steps ahead. Of course you wouldn't know whether you moved or not because you have no frame of reference, but still try. Put your intent on leaving the avatar and moving about 5 steps ahead. Stay here for a minute or two. This probably serves little purpose besides helping you to detach from the belief that you are inside your body. When there is light, it is hard to detach from the deception that your eyes create for you. Light snaps you back into that plane. In a pitch black room, we are detaching. We become one with the true reality: pure, unadulterated nothingness. Now I'm not saying that light is evil, or that it intends to deceive and trap you into this false reality. Light is merely a tool, not God. Stop serving the light as God. You are God. Your body is not God. Your body is a tool. A tool to explore this reality of light. (Sidenote: of course if you want to get really deep, everything is God, but you can't single things out) Without light, there would be very little experience on this plane. Without light, we wouldn't be able to witness the majesty of mountains and lakes, or the joy of a small child playing. We experience many beautiful things with the help of light. But we must also remember that this is not our true home. This is a false reality that we confine ourselves to. And for this reason, light is nothing but a beautiful liar.

There is no Self is the same as saying the Self is nothingness. It's not a thing, so obviously you can't grasp at it, but it's who you are eternally.

Have any of you ever had this sensation of being a drop of water that disconnects of whatever it was in, like that last drop of water when you close a tap that hangs in there for some time but eventually drop to the sink. I had it sometimes, not sure if I understand, I call it the "drop" and feels like there is something to do with my epiglottis and my uvula. Sometimes I can control them to help me breath more peacefully and sometimes this "drop" happens and its like a shinny 1 second free fall into nothingness and then I came back. Anyone had an experience like this ?

Hehehe... It's not clear to you because you haven't experienced the Absolute. No-self is just one facet of the Absolute. No-self is identical to Absolute Infinity and Emptiness. Infinity and Nothingness are identical. And of course there is no self, there is only the Infinite Self, which is Nothing, and Everything. You are God. God is Nothing. The end. There's no confusion here at all if you actually experience the Absolute fully. Buddhism = Vedanta = Yoga = Christianity = Islam = Judaism = Quantum Mechanics There is nothing to reconcile when your understanding is totally holistic and inclusive.

Thought and experience are the same. Without thought no experience. And to say consciousness is nothingness is an idea. As far as all of you are concerned consciousness is thought which determines experiences. If there was no memory, knowledge, and experiences then this would imply this nothingness. And we could say consciousness was then free of it’s conditioned/content/perspective. In actuality consciousness is everything the physical stimuli ‘senses’ and then thought being the response of memory, knowledge, and experience. This shows how you all seek new great experiences

People generally misunderstand what the word "consciousness" means. Consciousness is not mental activity. Consciousness is Nothingness. It is the "substance" of everything. This confusion happens because of the subtle assumptions of the materialist paradigm. Absolute Consciousness is what Buddha taught. It does not depend on the sense organs. The stuff that depends on the sense organs would best be called perception or experience. Yes, perception and experience is impermanent. Don't confuse consciousness with thinking or experiencing.

As part of my spiritual routine, 2 months ago I set out to understand and contemplate what the 5 senses are. I spent 20 minutes a day on average contemplating about what the 5 senses are, and where they come from. The main gist or insight I got out of those 2 months was, the materialistic paradigm is distinctly different to just mere thought, and calling it all unreal is just unfair. Idealism states that: "reality, or reality as humans can know it, is fundamentally mental, mentally constructed, or otherwise immaterial." While I agree that the world is immaterial, I disagree that the world is mentally constructed. My main question to people who adhere to idealism is this: If the world is mentally constructed, it should adhere to the properties of thought. Thoughts can be shaped off our own volition. We can visualise whatever we want, when we want. If the world as we know it is just a mental construct, then why can't we change the world off our own volition? Why can't we just dream up an ice cream in front of us right now? Yes you might say the world has the potential to be infinitely anything, as the world is nothingness, which is of course correct, but there is still something collapsing it to a particular state for right now! And that thing isn't just us dreaming stuff up, if it were, we would be able to control the world through imagination. And who or what even is doing the doing of mentally constructing stuff? If the world is mentally constructed, what is doing the mental construction? Or a better way to say it is, what tool or way are you using to figure out that the world is mentally constructed? The 5 senses aren't mentally constructed. The exist as real things or real phenomena. If they were mentally constructed, or if they were not real, they wouldn't exist directly in consciousness.

As far as consciousness work goes I've just been meditating for a couple of months now.I decided to read a bit of the Quran recently out of curiosity, since I'm a non-believer who was raised in a Muslim family. I'm also relatively familiar with the Quran due to having read it at various points in my life, with varying beliefs I had at the time of reading it. I'm just gonna talk about my thoughts on my own "non-dual" intepratation of the Quran. The Quran likes to talk about how those who commit themselves to God are ultimately on the right path and will be rewarded, and those who reject God will only find misery in hellfire. If we take "God" to be the "absolute" (or whatever word you want to insert here) , the nothingness from which everything comes from in your perception, then a take away from reading the Quran might be the idea that those who make a commitment to connect to the absolute (whether it be through yoga, meditation, devotion and etc) will reach heaven, a peaceful state of mind. However, those who are not mindful of and are ignorant of God will ultimately end up going through unbearable suffering (hellfire) as a result of them not connecting to the absolute. People will be trapped in suffering as a result of them not connecting to the absolute. I don't have many thoughts as to what the morality preached could mean. Perhaps the Quran is also trying to say that being charitable and doing other "good deeds" is a way to connect to the absolute, whilst doing "bad deeds" like adultery distances you from the absolute. However, the worst sin you can do in Islam (from a non-dual intepratation) is to not acknowledge that the absolute is there, and to not try to connect to it. A fundamentalist would call this sin "shirk". Shirk is the rejection of the fact that God exists, and that there is only one God. You could interpret this as meaning that the chief sin you can commit is to not recognize that all is one and that there are no boundaries between things, an ultimately non-dual teaching. Provided we are going with a "non-dual" intepration of the Quran, then we ultimately find the Quran is just repeating the same message, over and over again, since it keeps on talking about heaven and hellfire.The Quran likes to emphasise heaven and hellfire to tremendous degrees, more so than the Bible on a whole in my opinion (depends on which part of the Bible as well as though). Whether or not my intepration is separate from the authors' intent or not is unknown to me. Whatever the case, it was entertaining to read. My take away from the Quran is this: those who make the effort to connect to the absolute will find peace, and those who don't try to connect to the absolute will find misery. This is why it's important to set practices in place to connect to the absolute (Muslims like to pray for instance). So what do you make of religious scriptures? I feel as though that the Bible and Quran can only be seen in this light if you already have non-dual ideas about reality. The word "God" has different meanings to people, and it's ultimately a verbal semantic game when it comes to what you make of it. Given the fact that from a non-dual intepratation the Quran repeats the same message over and over game, it perhaps stands to reason that the Quran was written to be interpreted in the way that fundamentalists do so. But an argument about that would ultimately require an examination of history. Anyway, thanks for reading. And if anyone has a non-dual intepratation for what "Judgement Day" (the day when the world ends and every is either thrown into heaven or hell) signifies, I'm all ears.

How does that little girl in the projection realize herself as the screen prior? Well, anything that the little girl can do is only played out within the framework of the projection. She can’t get out of herself because she was never really in herself. The only she can do is to start dismantling her perceived notions of who she thought she were, and that means the entire framework within that projection (ex. Me and My World) to not be taking it personally. The distance the little girl has to jump in order to be the screen is 0. She is played out within the screen but to her it will feel like a great distance that has to be traveled “the spiritual journey” until it makes a loop back. What has changed then? Nothing but everythint? To who? Huh? If the projection is a seeker and wants to “abide” in the screen and wake up from the dream of consciousness, it has to go through a death period to experience with the body mind the prior. People say “nothing ever happened” or “there is nothing going on” or “nothingness” is because the screen has always been the screen whatever chaotic film may have been projected onto it.

I understand what you are trying to say. Yet there seems to be some kind of causality that every time you use this substance, you experience absolute infinity or nothingness. The better we understand these processes, the more target-oriented is our use of psychedelics and our spiritual practice in general.

Lol... You ARE Jesus! Jesus is Nothingness.

Last night i did around 20 minutes of kriya yoga and drifted off into deep meditation before bed. I usually do this. I experienced some shaking of my nervous system, this also happens sometimes when working with the kundalini. However this time was different. The usuall darkness ( with a hint of red) of the nothingness i dwell in during the meditation shifted. I started using a mantra ( I AM) as my mind started chattering. A few minutes into the mantra there was a clearing. The nothingness turned into a powerful shimmering golden light. There was no mind, no thought, it was so obvious, it was so clear, it was right there. I could not help but laugh and laugh. It felt like the magician showed me how the magic trick was done and i was laughing at myself for how obvious it was and how silly i had been. The laughing calmed... i meditated. It was blissfull, it was pure, i could go on forever without a problem. 15 minutes passed ( i think). I opened my eyes, i laughed some more, i spoke from the seat of my awareness. The clouds were gone. The smog had been lifted. What dominated was a presence, my awareness is what dominated the room, it was beyond my body, but my body was part of it, perhaps happening through it. It was perfect, i wanted more meditation, just to be with it. It lasted around 25 minutes in total, maybe longer, i dont know. I led down. It was over. The light as a feather state of bliss was gone... I am not sure. It felt like that was it, it just seemed so obviously the case, like i knew it. What is left is a desire to take the persuit more seriously and with more respect. Just thought i would share because i know you lot love this kinda shit, didnt know where else to go. Much love and peace to you all. xx

This is a very vague illustration and only post signs. Duality (identification with mind/body) "I am sitting here writing these words." - total identification (There is no "I am here thinking these thoughts, and my hand starts to move.) Non-Duality (identifcation with I AM, abiding in nondual (1) awareness) "I am having an argument with Lisa." non-identification with thoughts/emotions (Which one is Lisa?) Awareness is not localized to any specific place, just resting in I Am, prior to thoughts/emotions. Who is the one taking this photo? Imagine that there is no one taking this photo. That's you! Non-Existence/Prior to Non-Duality (Total Annihilation of both and seen through the dream of Existence/ No Universe/ Absolute Nothingness) ... I can't even... ^This throughout the entire Existence, complete annihilation. At this point, realization happens that there was never a world, people, or a Universe. The world is only there as long as there is a perceiver. No Existence/Consciousness, no world. This is prior to Non-duality, prior to Consciousness. At this point there are NO preferences between dual or nondual states, as these experiences come and go within the Absolute. You’re out. Zippo, nadda. Game over. These are all words and concepts and are a waste of your time. Haha I just wanted to share.

It is always so easy to say when you don't actually face the choice. When you are not facing nothingness and do not know what the consequences of the pill really are. might be that you would spit it out after all. Might be that you would regret it anyway...

The work from Gurdjeff suggests becoming aware of the different centres in oneself and then to observe negative thoughts and behaviours and basically to realise that typically we do not remember ourselves. (remembering that unconsciously our mind has all kinds of wrong ideas of who and what we are and that we are unaware of our nothingness. At this point one is supposed to work against the negative and unconscious I's by separating with an observing I. This is followed and joined by many other processes that I wont go into but you are right, I am maybe getting caught up a little too much in the theory side and there was some negativity there from myself today. Yes contemplation and self enquiry is something I try to do regularly although sometimes maybe I need to work on my closed mindedness, as some negative I's struggle to see /accept that many versions of reality and truth are co existing at the same time, within and without. I kind of see I, self and ego as the same thing. An illusion but then ultimately consciousness and being are also an illusion and then illusion is just a concept within a concept so everything is illusion but at the same time it is as real as it gets. One of Leo's quotes springs to mind.. "There is no path but only a fool doesn't walk it". Your advice is helpful. I do need to be more patient, observe my thoughts and actions more and apply the work practically without allowing negative I's to beat myself up about it. Thanks for the reply!

Yes, this part is probably missing. He didn't say it. Not all ppl who enter the monestary get to experience the no-self (nothingness). Ppl call this by different names: nothingness, everythingness, absolute infinity, Satori, Riding the Ox Backwards, etc. If you go on YT and look at Shinzen Young's 10 Ox Herding Pics, it ends with a monk (The Cloth Bag Monk) being helpful and giving to others in some way. This ending matches the clip above. That's why, even if the person didn't experience the no-self, if the person continues to be detached from the ego and be helpful to others (all is 'you' anyway), then experience of the no-self may come one day. @Prabhaker I could relate the most to Sai Baba and Shaolin monks put together. I've mentioned them here. The reason why is, both do live minimalist lifestyles, but they are able to give because they have developed themselves enough to give. They have nailed life. How can you give if you have nothing to give? We live in a different time than Siddhartha Gautama. How we give cannot be exactly the same as how he gave. Other's lifestyle have to be taken into consideration. @Ether Cool.

Now is appearance within nothingness. This is what you are, absolute nothingness, experiencing an appearance of you as people and things and universe, etc. It’s an experience of Self, in comparison to something specifically in the body, which is just a thought happening in the now. Any way you slice it, it’s you.

As the extrovert person moves on, he becomes one with the whole universe. As he advances, he reaches to a point beyond which nothing is left outside, he becomes identified with the outer world. The day this happens, nothing remains within or without. But by becoming one with the world outside, he finds himself and he finds the truth. Then he declares: ‘I am Brahman’. He becomes one with the entire universe. When he says: ‘I am the Whole’, he is indeed one with the Whole. Then he feels the moon and the stars are moving inside him. The introvert person while going deep within comes to a point where nothing is left to be seen, he becomes a void. Then he is able to say: ‘I am not’. Such as the flame of a lamp blows out and disappears -- everything disappears. The extrovert is ultimately able to grasp the whole. The introvert is ultimately able to grasp the shunya, the void. And both, the void and the purna, the whole, mean the same thing. But the extrovert reaches by moving along the outer journey; the introvert reaches by moving along the inner journey. At the end, the extrovert completely eliminates the inner world, nothing is left inside, only the outer world remains. The introvert goes on becoming oblivious of the outer world to such a point that nothing remains outside. And the interesting thing is that both the inner and the outer prevail together. Of the two only one cannot remain. Hence, when one disappears the other disappears too. If only the outer were to exist and nothing remains inwardly, the outer too will be no more. Because how would you otherwise identify the outer? In order for the outer to exist, the inner is necessary. It is only because there is the inner does the outer exist. If only the inner were to be left and nothing were to remain in the outer at all, how would you be able to call it the inner? It exists only in comparison to something of the outer, it is inner relative to the outer. For example, the pocket of your jacket -- its one part makes the inner side in which you put your hand, and the other is the visible part seen outside. Can you ever imagine a situation where only the inside of the pocket would remain without its outer part? Or, take your home, for example, Can you ever think that only the inner section of the house should remain and not what is outside of it? If only the interior part were to exist but not the outer part, the inner too will cease to be. If only what is outside were to remain and nothing inside, that which is outside the house would also cease to exist. The inner and the outer are two sides of the same coin. Hence, there are two ways to go about. Either drop the outer or drop the inner. With the falling of one, the other will also fall on its own accord. And then, that which would remain, which was present in the outer as well as in the inner -- in fact, it was always present even beyond the inner and the outer too. If our journey has been outward, then, that which would remain to exist we will call it the Brahman; if we have followed the inward journey, we will call it shunya, void, nirvana. Those who have seen god as Whole, they have traveled through the outer journey. Those who have seen god as a Void, they have followed the inner journey. It is not that while following the spiritual discipline of yoga, or the outer path, some day you will have to start with the Sankhya -- there is no need for it. Yoga itself will help you to reach. Let us look at it yet another way so that it becomes easier to understand. Let us assume a man is standing at the number ten and if he were to proceed from ten to number eleven and then twelve and so on, he would eventually reach to the infinite. A point will come where all numbers would vanish. If he were to come down from number ten to nine, eight, and thus move back, after reaching number one he would arrive at zero where all numbers are bound to disappear too. No matter from which end you begin your journey, the numbers will disappear. When this happens then it does not matter from where you started your search. That which will remain beyond the numbers will be the same. This can be understood in terms of Positive and Negative as well. Some people like positive words; these are the same people who are extrovert. Some people like negative words; these are the people who are introvert -- such as, the Buddha. Buddha is very fond of negative terms. Even if God were to appear before him, He would appear in terms of “nothingness”, in terms of void. Hence the word Buddha chose for his moksha, for his liberation is -- nirvana. And nirvana means: blowing of the lamp. Such as a lamp blows out, similarly, the individual blows out. What remains after that, is nirvana. Someone asks Buddha, “ What will happen to you after nirvana?” And Buddha says: “What happens when the lamp blows out? It becomes one with the Void”. So Buddha’s emphasis is on the negative. It is an introvert’s emphasis. Whenever an introvert will speak he will use negative terms. He will say: “neti, neti”, neither this, nor that. One wants to reach a point where nothing is left. But when nothing is left, everything is found. Then there is language of the positive: this, and this, and this too. When everything comes together, then what exists that too is all that IS. These are the only two ways. You can choose whichever kind of a journey you like. These two kinds appear very contradictory. They are contradictory as far as types are concerned, but as far as achievement is concerned there is no contradiction. One arrives through shunya, the void, as much as one arrives through the Whole. Some arrives by saying: neither this, nor that. Others arrive by seeing god in all -- they think and feel by realizing god in everything. The basic idea is one wants to reach at a point where duality exists no more. Duality can dissolve into nothingness in two ways; it can become non-existent if either one accepts everything, or one denies everything. It can happen if either all bondages are dropped, or all bondages are identified with the atman, the spirit. Either there is no bondage any more; or, the bondage itself becomes everything, the atman -- it becomes the universal, then too it ceases to be bondage. Neither the yogi needs to go into Sankhya, nor does the seeker of Sankhya need to go into Yoga. And yet, the point where both reach is the same. One does not have to make any changes. Both bring you to the same place. Each individual has to look within to see what one’s interests are, what is his or her true identity, whether one’s leaning is toward the positive or the negative; toward the Whole or the Nothingness. It can also be seen this way: if a person is of emotional type, if he is filled with emotions, the language of Wholeness will be acceptable to him. And if the person is of a very intellectual type, the language and expression of denial, of the Negetive will be acceptable to him. Logic negates, it follows the process of elimination. It goes on saying: this is meaningless, that is meaningless, that too is meaningless -- it keeps discarding until nothing is left to throw away. When nothing is left to throw out, the logic too drops on its own accord. BHAGAVADGEETA III - Karmayoga Translated by Swami Satya Vedant Discourses given by Osho at Cross Maidan, Bombay 28th December, 1970 - 7th January 1971

@Key Elements This is only recommended if the religious aspect of evolution is incomplete. The ascetic lifestyle is very aware. But it fails to give the truth of truths. The knowledge of Truths. Only the awareness which is good by the way. But you can't advance in terms of technology in terms of cellular evolution if knowledge is missing. If you become successful monk. Then you go beyond evolution. You reach the buddhic living beyond awareness. This is quite difficult. Then you are beyond realization you are fully empty. You reclaim the identity after you go through the phases of open space. I call it nothingness.

There is far more than the thought of the death of a thought. (That’s just a thought) The physical death referred to can’t be imagined or believed or understood. To point though, imagine being in front of yourself and watching your body and brain carrying on like normal. Then imagine being the space the universe is taking place in and watching an illusion much like you watch what’s going on in front of you right now. Then expanding to infinite nothingness which everything and nothing is taking place in, ‘within’ you. . The ‘physical’ “you” was left back in a dream, like an ant you passed by years ago without a second thought. It’s “dead” because it was never alive or dead to begin with.

Let's go straight at it, where did it all begin, how did it create and where is it heading? The modern science paradigm speaks of the big bang, a singular point in space and time with infinite density. This point contained everything, all matter and energy that is present in today's universe is from this beginning. In principle the big bang contained every event ever to happen but all happening in the same moment, then the inflection point was reached where all these events began to separate, this gave rise to time and space itself. Read that again, everything that will ever happen already existed, all in the same moment, but these events are distending from each other since the big bang. Is this the red shift that scientists speak of? The fading of all energy and eventually time itself will cease to exist or get infinitely small? In scientific terms they would call this the heat death of the universe, everything will separate so much form each other in all directions that the energy density in the infinite future would near zero or fade to exist. Without change, without increasing entropy time itself will stop to exist. So let's go to our basic view of the big bang. At I, we see the singularity in all it's glory, infinitely small, dense, containing all that is and will ever be! At II, the big bang has began (what caused it for now is a mystery, something outside of our physical time and universe). The expansion is happening in a constant rate towards all spatial dimension. Physically we can observe the three axis (X,Y,Z) they are present in this very moment and create our 3D world with length,width and depth. I assume this happens in all directions in the same rate and from a logical stand point the sphere is the most balanced shape we have. We see this everywhere in space, all forces are equally balanced, there is no preference towards any particular point in any direction. The exact moment after the big bang looked schematically looked like II and it does look exactly the same now, but where does it expand into? Is there even a thing to grow into or are we not growing but turning inside out. Yes, this is a completely new concept but this would be the idea of a cyclical universe, the universe is growing into itself from itself, like a torus turning inside out, being perfectly balanced and having no real edge but itself and the absolute starting point of it all, the singularity. Whoaa, space is folding in upon itself, let that settle for a while and think about the implications. If you were traveling on the edge of this sphere what would you see? It's not nothingness, you will not see any edge, you will only see more space filled with stars. The edge of the universe is the now! Why because this is where the future is still unwritten, but looking back we can see into the past and the origin where we came from. In this exact moment you are experiencing all of reality at the edge, don't think of it as something spatial, think of it as time. You are surfing on this expanding bubble into the future. Why can't we see into the future then? If we are on the edge we should be able to look back into the past (heat map of the universe) but also into the future? In some sense we already can with our minds, but not physically while looking into the skies of the universe. The light arriving to us has already happened and is looking into a frame of the past, but we cannot find such frame of the future. We could argue that looking into the past is actually looking into the future, because all the logical consequences that follow are derived from the past, so we can only know the future by looking at the past. Are the future and the past then the same thing, possibly. As we can see in this model which is much more logically sound and satisfying in my opinion the universe is a balanced place, it looks the same as every smaller fractal of itself in the cosmos. We see this toroidal shape EVERYWHERE, it's the basic shape that arises in any form of electro-magnetism and charges that flow. Now depending on your position in this relativistic shape where we float on, everyone see a different point of view in time, but they are all following the same path and to be completely accurate there is no separation in any of those events. The end and the beginning are the same for every event in space and time that will ever happen, again and again. Seeing the equilibrium point as our origin/singularity or the big bang also explains that time from our observable frame could have existed beyond what we can see from our physical universe. The time before the big bang is still part of the same process that create the new universe or passing through the eye of the singularity. This is what we want and what is the most logical, a continuous universe, if it exists now it will in the infinite future. It has always existed and will always exist. The big question that arises is if there was any first cycle, what was before this? My personal view is nothing, the universe really is a gift, the grandest of all.

Nothingness is like space,and in the end you are space going threw space

Think about a scenario where you were speaking but unaware of what you were saying. Someone asks you to repeat yourself you say "nothing". It wasn't nothing but you forgot so it was nothing. Now think of a scenario where you tell your friend you climbed the biggest mountain in Colorado and he tells you thats Nothing compared to his trip to Mt Everest Nothing is something that is always there, Everything is pointing towards it, like after you're done reading this post, my words will ultimately turn into nothing and you'll focus on some other part of nothing, some other facet of nothing to focus on. Nothingness is there between your thoughts, in your deep sleep, and right here in front of your eyes (which is also nothing) Its the meaninglessness of any meaning we assign Its not biological, its not physical What is it? it is nothing its only itself