Search the Community

With all due respect, Leo and anyone who is ascribing to his assertion in that post is the one taking the purely imaginative or delusional approach. If your "actual" nothingness has heat in it, it is not absolute nothingness, if it is still permeated by fields of potentiality like the universe is at all levels that is not absolute nothingness. If your absolute nothingness is being contained by matter in the form of bone, sinew, and brain matter it is not "absolute" nothingness. How about you move your mind out of the binary paradigm of beginning and endings and rise into quantum cognition? With superposition you are both 1 and 0 at the same time and can "birth" one or the other and from that one or the other "birth" another superimposed status. Humans all too often make the mistake of projecting their own limitations on the universe, but the universe doesn't give a shit and keeps on being dynamic with access to potentiality preserved. There aren't beginning or endings, there is instead recombination with different layers of complexity and synergy while still maintaining access to both poles of simplicity beyond our current evolution of cognition and levels of complexity that humans have not yet developed the cognition to contain. Every time a person falls into the paradigm of beginning or endings, they are taking an isolative view of reality which does not consider it's preceding combination. And that holds doubly true for absolute beginnings or endings which are a violation of the uncertainty principle. I'd like an evolving dialogue where people put the time and effort into expanding themselves in ways that are in harmony and synergy with real life with practical application. Where people critically think and explore rather than blindly follow the establishment of a given place. I'd like to see people work with tension and differentiating between how a change feels and how it shifts us. Gaining traction with those shifts, slowing and stabilizing them so their awareness can gain perspective and clarity around the nuance that occurs within it. I'd like to see people gain a greater ability with depth, to understand how things balance and counter-balance and how that motion affects the formation of a person's reality at the time. I'd like to see a lot of things actually. What do you want? Do you want to maximize your potential or do you want to remain in your comfort zone? Maybe try and feel the tension there, note down whether your initial reaction to that question was attractive or repulsive and then play the experience back in your mind slowly, including in your investigation the type of narratives playing in your mind. Investigating the other options you might have chosen had you not immediately snapped to either of those charges. Notice how much choice and potential we leave on the table and miss with our snap judgements and reflexive conclusions about a thing.

@Salaam I followed that thread, but as Leo already said, you confuse the scientific idea of nothingness with "actual" nothingness. You take a symbolic, indirect approach to something that is beyond all this. Whatever causes your thoughts may previously had, they are all born in nothing. Where else?

@Nahm I think the Ego doesn't like nothingness at all. It's rather afraid of it

Everything is everything. We're all where we are. I think the ego likes the 'nothingness' because it holds it as an achievement relative to others. At the same time it is a marker in a somewhat typical order of growth & inquiry revelations. The everything is everything.

Ultimately thoughts arise from nothingness. As this whole universe arose from nothingness. If you want to connect thoughts to a kind of causality between energetical and bodily shifts or events, you have to point to the beginning of the causal "event". But every beginning point of the causality chain is arbitrary and can be retraced back to the big bang which arose from nothingness. (If we belief that this big bang theory is true). Ultimately every moment arises and disappears in nothingness

Your writings seem to indicate that you on a deep level believe that there actually exist a person/ego/mind ...? "even if it feels real to the one that is not real." Feels real to the real that is not real? ... Personality / ego / -being a seperated self capable of gettin hurt- feels real to that which IS real (= Awareness, you, me, everything, nothing), while truly the ego is not real: It's no-where to be found, it's a concept. Even the body is a concept, it doesn't exist either. That which doesn't exist can't be you. You do exist, but not as anything your mind can imagine or logically comprehend. You exist as self-aware nothingness, and even THAT is a concept. "nothingness" is a concept. "self-aware" is a concept. Everything we speak of on this forum is concept, concept, concept. It's ALL relative. It's not absolute/eternal. "The Tao that can be spoken is not the eternal Tao". !! "Indulge me in the following: How can one that is not the body/mind take a pill designed for the body/mind and be affected in any way." No one took any pill. None took the LSD. You assume something that is not the body/mind is actually capable of taking a pill? If we say that "someone" is taking "a pill" then we are speaking relatively. There is no pill. There is no human being to take the pill. There is no body/mind to be affected. There is only you to perceive the game of life. In this game of life interesting experiences can happens when a body takes LSD. The body or mind is not affected by it though. The only one that is affected by it is YOU! And at the same time you are not affected by it at all. Reality is a paradox. You are both deeply affected by all experience you experience and at the same time not affected at all by any experience. "The one typing is the Ego that feels it was enhanced because of the experience of no Ego - this is paradoxical." There is no ego typing anywhere. There is no ego that could be enchanced or not enchanced. Relatively speaking, yes, the good guy jjer94 here wrote a post here about his LSD-experience. You can say it is the ego typing, sure, but it's just relatively speaking, there is really no ego if we speak in terms of absolute truth. "Does the Ego's pain or unhappiness even matter? It matters only to the Ego itself" There is no owner of any pain or unhappiness or happiness. There is experience of pain, there is experience of unhappiness, there is expierence of anxiety, there is experience of love. That which experiences all these things is 'The Absolute Self'/Nothingness/Awareness/blabla , it's not the ego, because there is no ego! Therefore it can't matter to any ego! It can only matter to the Absolute Self. In truth it doesn't matter at all to the Absolute Self, and yet at the same time it matters a lot to the Absolute Self, because who/what else could it possibly matter to? When you feel pain and unhappiness it surely doesn't feel nice, so of course it matters (and yet it doesn't). It's all a dream. Within the dream everything matters, at least as long as you're not aware of the fact that it's a dream. When you realize it's a dream you see that nothing matters inside the dream... However, to follow along with the dream analogy, if all you did was dreaming (you never woke up), and there was nothing else besides the dream, then the dream must matter in itself. Cos there is nothing else that could possibly matter. So the dream both matter and doesn't matter. Life/reality is a dream that you can't wake up from, except for short periods of time ("no-self experiences/ego death experiences/"enlightenment experiences). However, you can become conscious of the fact that it is a dream (through these no-self experiences), or you can live your whole your life not ever becoming conscious of it. The dream remains in either case, you can never wake up from it. The dream is all there is.

@Echoes Thats right! You should check out headless.org. Inspired by Douglas Harding who wrote The Man with No Head. The site has experiments, such as The Pointing Experiment where you point to a distant object and then point to where you think your head is. Sorry! No head, and no face. You are nothingness, (Source), experiencing itself. You are Nothing and Everything simultaneously. Namaste.

This is all just conceptualization, yes. It's nothing worth compared to direct experience with an ego-death experience. When the mind/ego is gone, what is left is only _you_, the real you, the essence of your being, and only then can you truly see who/what you really are. As long as the mind is running, you will not see yourself. You will only see what the mind is giving you. And it gives you bombardments of thoughts and emotions all day long. Even feelings you're not consciously aware of, such as the feeling of being an individual self. This feeling you take for granted as reality, i.e. you can't possibly imagine how reality would be like if you didn't feel as a separated self, and thus, because you're not able to imagine this, you're naturally not able to be aware of the fact that in EXACTLY the same way as the mind is giving you thoughts like "I gotta do x and y to be happy" and giving you emotions like anxiety, joy, etc, the mind is ALSO currently 24/7 giving you an underlying feeling of being a separated self. And this feeling of being a separated self is directed towards the body. The mind convinces you that you are this separated mind and thus the body. Currently, you're not seeing your true self. You are still 'it'/the true self (always have been, always will be), but you're currently not conscious of it. You have played a trick on yourself where you have identified yourself with the mind (and thus also the body). And naturally you have completely forgotten that you made this trick in the first place. I say "played a trick on yourself" because ultimately that's what you've done. Sure, it is relatively speaking the mind that is misleading you, but the mind is ultimately not only perceived by you, but naturally also created by you and also contained within you (you=consciousness=nothingness=pure being). Because what/who else could possibly have created the mind, except for you? And can you locate the mind anywhere? Can you locate your feelings anywhere? Can you locate your thoughts anywhere? No, you can't. It's because these "things", which are experiences, are located within nothingness (which is ultimately what true reality is; it's litteraly NOTHING, nothing, nothing, nothing =)). You are this nothingness. This nothingness is self-aware. This is why we could also call it infinte consciousness, awareness, being, etc.. It's you! The funny thing is while most people will agree they can't locate their thoughts and feelings anywhere (except some will maybe say "in my head/brain" but that's just retarded (:D), cos if I open up your skull I surely can't find any thoughts:D), they still believe they can locate other experiences that are not thoughts or feelings. For example the experience of seeing an object. For example your feet. "My feet are right there!" No, to be honest, they are not anywhere to be found, except within you: consciousness. Everything you experience: thoughts, feeling of being a self, emotions, sight, sounds, its only true location is within you, it's only true origin is from you, and it's all seen by you. Does the waves in the Pacific Sea make any sound if there's none nearby to have a listen? No. Sure, they may -- relatively speaking -- make soundwaves in the air. But if there isn't any special physical system (a human body for example) nearby to process these soundwaves, surely they don't make any sound. Sound is a mystical experience, how does energy-waves through the air get transformed into the experience of 'hearing sound' which we are all very familiar with? No minds know it, i.e. no one know it. But no-one/nothingness, hey, who's that? That is you. And surely you know very well how energy-waves through the air gets transformed into the experience of hering sound. Just clap your hand, and see what happens. But you cannot intellectualize it, the mind doesn't know how it's done through logic. That's why we also tend to say reality is illogical. Well, isn't it funny, science tells you that the "brain tells you what you are hearing". Science also tells you that you are a physical brain. How funny. If we combine the two science-statements, we got: "The brain tells the brain what the brain is hearing" or "the brain tells itself what it's hearing". And that's a paradox. And it's bullshit. A brain can't hear anything. Only you can. Because hearing is an experience, and a brain can't experience anything, just like a stone can't experience anything. But the statement "the brain tells you what you are hearing" in itself is pretty accurate, actually. The big question still remains though: What/who is/are you? Anyway. Questions: "So to see who I am, I just have to turn off the mind - well does that mean, that I just need to go to sleep?" Well, no. When the body is in deep sleep the mind is still functioning as normal, because it's normal to sleep, that's what the brain is programmed to do every now and then (to sleep). You could also say that the mind/ego is gone in deep-sleep, and what's left is really only you (nothingness/infinite empty consciousness), which is arguably true. However, when you wake up, you have no memory of 'knowing' your true self.. See, there is a difference between BEING your true self and KNOWING your true self. Being your true self, well you are ALWAYS your true self, you just don't it, and instead you believe your true self is equal to the mind/body, so there is no difference between being awake or being in deep sleep, you are still 'it'. 'Knowing' your true self is an entirely different thing, which isn't easy. And after all it is not the mind per se that has to be shut down, but it's just the 'feeling of being a self' that has to go away. And since this feeling is what is the foundation for all the other workings of the mind, it's easiest to just say that you have to kill the mind to see yourself. How do you kill the mind? Psychedelics are good. Meditation is good. Deep contemplation and paradoxes are good to make the mind go crazy and shut down. What you have to do is to let go of attachments, let go of investments in life. As long as you are attached to things in life, investing in things in life, it will be nearly impossible without psychedelics to achieve ego-death, even if you meditate for decades. Because the mind's function is to attach to things and to invest in things (looks, carrer, family, friends, sex, money, success, materialism). And as long as you continue to do that, no matter how hard you meditate, the mind will probably stay. Because it's still being used (although less if you actually meditate for +30 min a day, which will naturally increase your awareness on the long-term, because awareness = you = nothing, and the more "you do nothing" (=meditate) the more you will become you (in a sense), i.e. the more awareness 'you' will "get".) EDIT: Note also, that I'm NOT talking about being "free" of ego/mind "forever". An ego-death experience IS imo a momentarily experience. The ego (= the mind) will always come back and stay with you until the body dies. The mind/the ego/a person is an ever-changing idea/concept though, and some of the biggest changes to a mind/person will come if the mind/person is ever witnessed being killed (and thus combined with a realization that one is not a body/mind/person). A single ego-death-like-experience ("an enlightenment experience"/"satori") will in itself most of the time be enough to have big, big impact on your life. After such experiences more work has to be done though. "Enlightenment" is not a state to achieve, rather it's an ever-ongoing proces of becoming more and more aligned with the truth in your life. And being aligned with truth (your true self) doesn't mean you have to sit in a cave 24/7, no, no. Sitting in a cafe 24/7 is something you can do to get those ego-death experiences. When you have got them, you stop sitting in a cave 24/7. You can do anything in life and be aligned with truth (almost, you probably wouldn't do things that create suffering for other beings). You can be a doctor, a guru, an artist, a cleaning lady, whatever. The difference is how you relate to life on an inner level. Do you see that it's all a game and that you are playing a role in this beautiful game of life, or do you not? If you believe you are a body, of course you won't see life as a beautifil game, since when the body dies this will then mean you will die as well, and then that's serious business man, that's not a game ;). I also believe there are varying degrees/depths of ego-death-experiences. Obviously the deeper the experience = the closer to being completely one (= conscious) with truth/your true self = the deeper the impact on your life. I believe there are semi-ego-death-experience which only give you glimpses of truth, but not the "full-blown package" so to speak. I think most reported ego-death experiences are semi-ego-death experiences. The real full-blown ego-death experiences probably requires a combination of contemplation/meditation for decades + 5-MeO maybe. What do I know=)

When you see that you're the canvas, the only possibility is to continue painting, consciously. Paint the Ego the way you, the transparent infinite Self want. Choose the colours of your Ego consciously. <3 Make the colours and thoughts that you dont want transparent by bearhugging ? them to death. Nothingness is transparency is God is the motherboard. Nothingness is this moment. Nothingness is untying the knot of the Ego. Transparency is Nothingness, nothing added, from the mind, so what is can be seen through a clean window, without fog. Close your eyes and try to imagine transparency iin your inner eye. But try doing it with open eyes too, ha, you see, you've always be doing it, just maybe not conscious of it. Ego pretends to be everything, enlightenment is transparent nothing, breath, water, lightness, 0. 0 allows me to be.

Nothingness is transparency; Nothingness is silence; Nothingness is stillness; Nothingness is no thing to do, other than what you're doing; Nothingness is nowhere to be, other than where you are. Nothingness is the screen of awareness; Nothingness is no Ego. Nothingness is enlightened and my Ego is the dance of that light. Transparent Ego is enlightened Ego. Any image at 0% transparency disappears, no matter what was on the canvas. When you make something transparent, you see what was hiding underneath the entire time. You, the empty canvas of awareness. Transparent consciousness, ever present, eternal and infinite.

@Kloof I've had some experiences in the last year that I'm still sorting out. It is very strange to have other massive 'realizations' as well, along the way here. Even stranger to have thought you'd figured something out after some big epiphany, only to learn months later that - no, I was wrong, that thing can't be right now that I know THIS thing. The 'one original source' thing is my way of saying God, or Source, or the Unity Field or whatever. My limited understanding at this point all points to 'God' or Infinity being all there really is (as nothingness, empty, non-dimensional, non-localized, self-aware, nothingness, that subsequently contains everything).. and it seems to me that that everyTHING, all the content of awareness, is only occuring within awareness, as perception manifested by our finite minds. Infinity cannot know anything finite, but it is self aware. In order for there to be a 'world' (universe), it must be perceived, and only a finite entity can know finite 'objects'... sooo.. infinity must sort of fall asleep and forget itself as boundless infinite self-aware loving nothingness, and dream up our finite minds in order to know anything but itself. So none of it is what you thought it was, ...Aaand, you're not what you thought you were. It's scary and silly-fucked when you start to put it all together. 'You' don't exist. We're dream-states, doing our own evoking of reality, through all our "individuated" consciousnesses... so that the ONE original Source, or God, can have a chance to begin to 'know' something other than itself. When we, as individuated, finite minds start to wake up to that fact (become lucid, within this very convincing dream), it is "God" (empty self-aware no-THINGness), somehow beginning to become more and more lucid that it has created a 'reality' of diverse and separate object within the original dream. I'm surmising that consensus reality, the whole 'self-consistency' thang Leo speaks of is self-consistent only because the original Source is ONE. Utimately there is only ONE. We are all ONE. WTF eh? (I'm pretty new, so please forgive me if this is a horribly messed up, misrepresentation of 'reality', or existence.)

"The One" absolutely needs to create "false selfs" to be able to experience itself. This is pure logic. Light needs darkness. Darkness needs light. it's all one thing. Contrast. If all that existed was "Being" / Infinity / The One / Nothingness then "it" wouldn't know itself. Individualized "physical" bodies walking around believing they exist as independent, individualized selfs goes hand-in-hand with "The One"/"God", i.e. you can't have one without the other "God" needs to make itself believe that it's not "God" -- in the first place -- to ever be able to experience itself. Therefore, no you don't have an eternity to be "the One". You have no time actually. you have this present moment to experience your true self, and that's it.

"You only have maybe 80 years to be this particular human with all its imperfections, while you have an eternity to be the one." Hehe. Dangerous assumptions being made here imo. You already are 'it'. ("it" = 'the one' / nothingness / consciousness / God, and so on.) You have always been, and will never not be. You are currently having an (illusory) experience of being a human body. You are still truly 'it', however, and will never not be.

This is something that's confounded me for a while, and perhaps I won't be able to resolve this until I have deeper direct experience. Supposedly,all is one, but that one is both everything and nothing. Non-dual, I assume would imply one rather than two, an absence of distinction, and from that perspective, I can't imagine any observation one could make about "What is relationship?" other than the one you've made. However, since the non-dual, the absolute is Nothingness, I wonder if there would be a way to address that from that perspective, that is the absolute beyond all perspective. Since Nothing has no qualities what-so-ever, do you think it would be possible to gain wisdom on the nature of relationships from that state of being, perhaps intuitively and without reasoning? When we look at the Non-dual as a unified whole, a singularity of sorts, I think we can can start to contemplate on a conceptual level such as you've done here. But I'm curious about contemplating on the Absolute which is absent of qualities what-so-ever. Would intuition from direct experience be the only means? I like this transition as a way to expand upon your initial observation. I've noticed that I tend to do this too when dealing with the very fundamental. We've established a fundamental assumption about the non-dual Oneness only being able to have a relationship with itself that the ultimate level. From this, it's easy to conclude that, from the same perspective, relationships between two people (duality) are illusory, just as with everything else in existence (duality also). This is where I would personally find it difficult to draw further conclusions based on the previously established assumptions, so if I wanted to expand on the topic, the easiest thing to do would be to extrapolate, as you've done by transitioning to a somewhat tangential but ultimately still relevant question, which giving a reason for why the illusion exists. Something I'd like to note at this point is we've seem to have gradually become more and more conceptual in our inquiry. We started at the Absolute (perhaps as Nothingness) or perhaps as Oneness, not sure if Oneness is necessarily a conceptual dissociation from the being-level of the Absolute/Nothingness, or if it is just the same,but Oneness is simply a better reference point for non-dual vs. dual distinctions. Then we transition to a more conceptual level by using our assumption to conclude that relationships between two different entities are illusory. Then we transition to yet an even more conceptual level by using that to speculate on reasons for duality/illusion. I'm not sure if this is indicative of how natural it is for us to want to abstract away from the being level toward consensus reality. where we do most of our thinking. The way you've structured your inquiry so far resonates with my personal though patterns; I wonder if it is just coincidence or we can observe more closely to learn thing about our minds tend to reflect on these types of questions. I also wonder if this tendency to quickly move to more abstract terms when speaking of the absolute, perhaps out of necessity, is the most effective means of raising consciousness or if we should move the other way and try to fixate on the absolute despite it being difficult (impossible?) to really make any sort of philosophical observations about it. I'm going to come back and finish up this post later. My shoulder hurts at the moment.

@Gurunext "Ego is You" "You came to existence because it was useful for Source to make a split. " "Source wants to grow" "As I've mentioned - Ego can't be destroyed anymore. It's good enough in a state that it is and will serve Source in one way or the other." Mate. You. Are. Lost. Take some psychdelics and you'll see. You can't really theorize about this. Or, of course you can, but it's worth absolutely NOTHING compared to direct experience with what reality is. But I can also theorize and tell you where you're wrong. 1. Ego is not you. You is not ego. Ego is a concept. You are a concept. Ego is nothing. You are nothing. You don't exist. You are nothing. You get it? You prolly don't, but let me repeat: The "you" you think you are = illusion. Plain and simple. What you really are is nothingness/conciouscness/"Source" as you call it. 2. You have always existed and will never not exist. You = "Source" = Nothingness = Consciousness 3. To be clear, You have no desires to grow or not grow. You have no desires actually. The only desire you have is Being/Love because that's the natural state, and even that is not really a "desire", it's just the ground state of reality as i said. 4. Ego can't be destroyed of course, because there is no fucking ego to be destroyed in the first place It's an illusion. What CAN be "destroyed" momentarily is this illusion, i.e. the illusory "feeling" of being an indvidiual self can be destroyed. But as you can read, it's just a feeling, there is no self/you anywhere to be found (see this for yourself, it's not that hard to grasp, or maybe it is lol). 5. Let me repeat. What you really are is NOT ego. What you really are is non-concept, non-word, non-thing, non-non-thing... it's: Nothing at all. Therefore since you are nothing there is no "you" to serve any 3rd-party-thing ("Source"). You are making a religion here. But let's be clear: God is unknown by those who know what God is. God is known by those who don't know what God is. That's two paradoxes for your mind to think about. Ego = Mind = Person = Illusion. Since in this reality we call you a person and me another person, this clearly shows that this world we live in = one big fat illusion; A game of playing out certain roles;) In reality, you are not an ego, you are not a mind, you are not a person. A mind/person is an EXPERIENCE to have. You are currently having the experience of having a particular mind/being a particular person. I am currently having another experience of having a particular mind/being a particular person. You = I = Nothingness = God = "Source" = Absolute Infinity = Consciousness = and so forth, call it what you want, it's nothing. It is possible to have an (momentarily) experience of not being a particular person (getting rid of the biggest illusion played by yourself). Such an experience we normally call "ego-death" or a "no-self-experience" or an "enlightenment experience". Go have one and then come back and theorize

Don't confuse Nothingess/Absolute/God/Consciousness with scientific ideas of nothingness. Two totally different domains.

Do you understand how physically cold an actual experience of true nothingness would be? Just reaching the "edge" of absolute zero is 100 million times colder than the depths of space. It would kill you. Our bodies can't handle such an extreme. People may think or believe they've experienced "true nothingness" but that is just a label and not what they're really experiencing.

It's about balance and the very real truth of protecting potentiality from the delusional extremism of absolutes and stasis. Protecting the reality of the dynamics of motion. It's about showing how the compulsion for Absolute Certainty is a flaw humans have to develop from in order to have a level of cognition more in line with quantum mechanics. A quantum cognition with perpetual motion, potential, and superposition, rather than unitary or binary stasis. Voids or vacuums are not an environment with absolute nothingness, there is no absolute beginning or ending, no absolute zero, no absolute or true self, no absolute or one truth. Instead there is always motion and access to something potentially different, no matter how "fixed" or "solid" or completely empty something appears to be. Everything can always change and that change is never so absolute, that it can't change into something else. It also points to a fundamental truth of the connection between specificity and limitation. And how that connection is counter-balanced by uncertainty and potentiality.

So what you are saying is because of the third law of thermodynamics, nothingness or the void cannot exist in absolute terms. It is nonsense as you says. Because everything is in motion - no temperature can mathematically and literally hit zero. This implies constant movement for what the universe is made up of which is atoms and molecules. This sort of thinking implies that you believe nothingness to be some sort of absolute thing and that the absolute is pure stillness. And it cannot exist because well, nothing ever goes to zero. The truest thing we have is movement according to what you say. Correct me if I'm wrong. I would, however, like for you to reevaluate that assumption that nothingness or the void cannot exist. Who says nothingness cannot exist? Have you ever had an experience of true nothingness? There are insights that can be grasped that are outside of the rational paradigm. They are paradoxical in nature, but they are certainly out there. And that includes the insight that reality is NOT made up of matter, energy, molecules, atoms, but NOTHING. Literally nothing. It is unbelievable. Nothingness is what is left when you remove all of the ideas and concepts and you are left with raw reality. But to understand this, you need to do an empirical investigation. This means using your senses, including vision, taste, touch, feeling, etc to enquire into the truth of existence. No one can do that for you, but yourself. Get outside of your rational mind and you might glimpse nothingness. It's right under your nose!

? How can you force someone to become enlightened with low consciousness? I am starting to see that there is indeed quite a rainbow of what it means to be enlightened (like maybe how I felt lighter when I finished my homework when I was younger, or maybe how monks have ascended to nothingness, or in this forum, the recognition of your lack of self). But where is this idea coming from that the CIA was forced into enlightenment?

@jseAn example, we just discussed - how does nothingness produce something? Another - how does change appear in a changeless consciousness? Another - what are qualia?

Why do we take getting enlightened as the ultimate truth? Why is nothingness taken as the ultimate truth? All evidence we have is some people with enlightenment experiences. I understand that it feels like the truth, but is it really?

So ironically it is the embracement of separateness and connection? Kind of nothingness and existence comes together and forms non-duality? May be? Or saying this, is just demogogy?

@Nahm Well, that's all I know if its useful very good, anyhow everyone must know from their own experiences. I see that your theme is free will vs determinism. Its an age old debate. The answers are different depending on where you stand. It depends on how deeply you know yourself (consciousness) and how much introspection you do on such matters. It looks like you have firm beliefs about QM/SR/GR and other theories. And you try to mix them with experience. It may or may not work. At most you will get paradoxes. Just remember that theories will take you no where, only direct experience can. Drop all beliefs, start clean. My direct experience tells me that the "choice" or "will" is an illusion. The event happens, a person or doer is created on the fly and the event is tagged as a "choice" of that person. Who is doing it? Obviously no one. But there is not nothingness, as you say, it must come from somewhere. Here you must see directly. All events happen, they come from nowhere and go nowhere. There is no source, not anything that can be known. Mind only knows that which is already organized, anything outside of that is unknowable. You can imagine a big doer outside there, an even bigger doer even more outside of outside and so on, but it'd be just fantasy - unknowable. Ah, all knowledge refers to known or knowable. Obviously unknowable cannot be knowledge. So when I say it all falls on your feet, i do not mean even the unknowable gets known. Its not possible, its by definition.

The question is what is to happen when lots of people would get it? http://www.hebrew4christians.com/Articles/kabbalah/Creation/creation.html Here it looks to me that there should be some kind of ascension, it says "repairing of the world". Maybe like a man coming back from a long coma but for the whole of the universe? Are there any sources on what could multiple enlightened people come up with if working together in groups like scientists? Or is this experiential understanding all that there is? Maybe such people where never put together and having all their material needs met so that they can focus on further self study? Clearly enlightened people continue on living as usual people, they do not get frozen for the rest of their lifes with this Nothing is not Nothing revelation. But this should be the fringe where something mystical is happening, and it's not. As for example when we discover superconductivity, objects start flying on their own. So why there seems not to be any practical implications of enlightenment in the world? Only some enlightened people left some texts so that if someone were to have enough of an open mind and zeal, he could reach what they've reached. I haven't read the Jew scriptures, but here are some people with knowledge I understand. If their in-scripture view of the world is one of an enlightened human and should be taken literaly, is there anything else profound in there, which should be taken literally and which shows next steps after mass enlightenment? All this people with knowledge of a Nothingness could not possible think only about making the world a more harmonious, prosperous place, it's literally ridiculous. As are my sixteenth-assed attempts at grasping all this.