Nothingness & God -> Let's Go!

[ForEverAfter]

So, I was trying to think of a way to connect the religious and the non-religious, alike.
Because, we're all part of the same species / food-chain / planet / solar system / galaxy / universe.

But what do we have in common?
The answer is: nothingness / loneliness.

If there is a God that is all encompassing (as there is, according to most religions),
then that God is everything and He (it / She / Allah / Jesus / whatever) is alone...

I think I've had a glimpse of that loneliness.
Life explodes out of it.
That's what this is, I think.
We are the solution to nothing.

Atheism / theism: the same; they just make different assumptions about God.

...

I apologize about the title of the thread, if you're still reading.
I've been translating a lot of Japanese. Couldn't resist an exclamation.

...

The big question is almost always phrased with the following inclination "Why are we here?"
Here, as opposed to not being here. So, it's just as reasonable to ask, "why shouldn't we be here?"
"Should nothing exist?"

As it stands, it is half a question.
If God is everything, he must create (for fear of going mad).

That's all this is, I think.
It is like a breath, the universe.
It doesn't need a grand reason.

Me, writing this. You reading it.
Everything that has ever happened.
Just one of God's trips.
Just a fingerprint.

Nothingness: sometimes, I think it's beautiful, and it gives me strength; at other times, it scares me.

...

What do you think?
If you believe in God, is God alone? (If not, why not?)

 

[-=SS=-]

I agree that God is alone, though I wouldn't say the cause for all 'this' is because it was lonely.. more that the mechanics of existence require there to be some sort of polarity. I don't know, in my mind I imagine this all encompassing single polarity (singularity) of awareness/god/energy/whatever, but it isn't perfectly symmetrical.. which causes it to twist, fold, and stretch until polarity occurs. Funnily enough a Belgium inventor (he made 'Happy Cubes') came up with a video representation of this idea.. hiding away in a corner of youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTn5lSTBxro. Was interesting to see someone else had had the same ideas.

Because our awareness is connected to this totality of awareness (god), this is perhaps why relationships mean so much to us. Of course you could say it's because we're human and we're social creatures, which is true, but if we all have this kind of spark inside of us, so when you see/feel that in someone else that is god coming face to face with another aspect of itself.

You know I was going to post a thread similar to this about a week ago after some dreams I had, titled 'Is God mad?'. To me it's a beautiful madness, creating/twisting/unfolding itself because there literally is nothing else it can do.. it's like a self-perpetuating kaleidoscope.. some kind of mathematical anomaly that has no end. I have gotten this impression when I used NN-DMT in the past. I've also heard an enlightened man saying (about his experience) that 'If this is God, it is very lonely'. I wonder if this is also part of the reason why we fear death so much.. because intuitively we know that after we die we realize the truth and want to come back again in the hopes of experiencing that connection to other people again (love).

EDIT: Just looked at the comments on the video I posted. First comment.. "Wow... we're you on the same DMT journey I was? This is similar to what's been brewing in my head the last three months.". Haha

 

[ForEverAfter]

That video was hilarious.

He's basically arguing that the universe fucked itself into existence.
The membrane (hymen) was penetrated by a vibrating column with a bell shaped end!

(I watched it twice will peaking on DXM and shrooms.)

 

[What 23]

Nothing is a very powerful thing.

 

[-=SS=-]

He's basically arguing that the universe fucked itself into existence.

And on the first day, God commanded himself, "Go fuck thyself into yonder existence!".

 

[Jabberwocky]

I read recently that ascension is a bridging of the nothingness with the oneness. What bridging it means doesn't really make sense to me. Certainly, it we take it in the additive sense: 0 + 1 = 1. If we take it in the multiplicative sense 0 x 1 = 0. If we divide by zero we get an interesting paradox that is the basis for many types of higher math. I got a vague taste of what that could mean recently, but the confusion was overwhelming.

Thanks for the video, it reminds me of the quote from the course of miracles:

"The creative power of God and his creations is limitless, but they are not in
reciprocal relationship. You communicate fully with God, as he does with
you. This is an ongoing process in which you share, and because you share
it, you are inspired to create like God. Yet in creation you are not in a
reciprocal relation to God, since he created you but you did not create him. I
have already told you that only in this respect your creative power differs
from his. Even in this world there is a parallel. Parents give birth to
children, but children do not give birth to parents. "

 

[Foreigner]

Maybe I'm just not in the right mindset, but I'm not clear on the premise of this thread. The idea that God is having sex with itself out of loneliness, and fucking the universe into creation, or that God is even lonely in the first place, seems like dualistic thinking. The universe may be expanding and changing, but it's already perfect. Creation and destruction, life and death, nothingness and oneness, all take place within the One.

Nothingness doesn't mean non-existence, it means that it is Empty of self or a narrative. (I capitalize words for the sake of conversation. Not trying to create further dualities here.) When you stare into the Void, it stares back.

All these words being used to describe something that is undivided...

Trace the words back to their origin, and then to a time before words existed. Whatever that pure experience was, without language, simply being -- that was probably closer to the truth that whatever it is we're talking about here. Nothing is wrong, nothing needs to change -- it's all happening right now, in this moment.

 

[ForEverAfter]

I'm not saying anything needs to change, or that anything is wrong.
And, you might be wrong about whether or not God experiences loneliness.

We transition from man to God when we die.
We transition from a world full of people to a state of infinite oneness.
Perhaps loneliness isn't the right word, but I don't think there is a suitable word to describe it.

I made the thread when I was pretty high.
The thread is about nothingness, as it pertains to God / singularities.

There have been a lot of threads about God.
We've never really covered whether or not God is "alone".
(Again, probably the wrong word, but you know what I mean.)

If you don't want to discuss it, then don't.

Trace the words back to their origin, and then to a time before words existed. Whatever that pure experience was, without language, simply being -- that was probably closer to the truth that whatever it is we're talking about here.

I don't think you can make assumptions about God and time.

Trace it back? How?
And to when?

God - if you believe in Him - exists now (as much as he did at the "beginning" of time).

that was probably closer to the truth that whatever it is we're talking about here

Uh-huh...
And what was that?
Do you have any idea?
Is it not worth talking about?

(I was joking about the universe fucking itself into existence.)

I read recently that ascension is a bridging of the nothingness with the oneness. What bridging it means doesn't really make sense to me. Certainly, it we take it in the additive sense: 0 + 1 = 1. If we take it in the multiplicative sense 0 x 1 = 0. If we divide by zero we get an interesting paradox that is the basis for many types of higher math. I got a vague taste of what that could mean recently, but the confusion was overwhelming.

The number one - mathematically - doesn't represent unity, or everything.
You should be working with zero and infinity, or zero and a singularity.
Or (see: Russel's paradox) the universal set versus the null set.

the confusion was overwhelming

I think it's complicated mathematically.
But, it can be explained fairly simply.

Perhaps everything is illusory.
In that sense, we are here and we are not here.

The people in your dreams: they are you, but you believe they aren't so you can interact with them.
They don't really exist, in the sense that they're illusory, but they do exist as part of you.

I read recently that ascension is a bridging of the nothingness with the oneness.

I'm very wary of any man (including Buddha) claiming ascension or enlightenment.
Is it possible to rise to the peak of human spiritual potential?
Will nobody ever be "more enlightened" than the Buddha?
Claiming absolute enlightenment is unenlightened.

Having said all that, I agree about bridging nothingness with oneness.
Tibetan Buddhism is all about death.
Death is a bridge.

 

[Foreigner]

When I say "nothing is wrong", what I'm really saying is that nothing needs to be done. All that's happening is what's happening. Saying that God is lonely, or applying any other attribute, is mere mental projection. Lonely implies a condition, or a state of being. It also implies that God would look for a solution to this loneliness. Isn't that just the human condition we're talking about, in that case?

No one knows what happens when we die. It's all supposition. As someone who has experienced near death several times in my life, I still can't tell you what to expect. I only know what my experience was, and that might not be saying much. On that note, why isn't here enough? Why does it even matter what God is or isn't? Isn't this moment enough, without a story?

All I know is that beneath all semantics, all concepts, all mind, is stillness, peace, connection, and love. If there is a God then that is its natural state. At the very least it's our natural human state, once we stop identifying with this "I am me and this is mine" crap. It's a pure awareness which contains everything, including all questions, answers, and their contradictions. So from that understanding, I guess you're right, God is lonely. It's also ecstatically in love, blissed out, depressed, all of it -- because humans are those things, and we are part of God. But in its entirety, lonely? Doubtful. The Om is all of those things, and none of them.

God is unknowable. I don't know how you (or anyone) can even ascribe specific traits to it, as if you know.

Why do people pretend their concept is true? Is the truth, that it's all Empty, that difficult to accept? I guess so... because it means the end of your own self-concept, if you take it to its natural conclusion.

I don't know why God has to be something. I don't know why I have to be anything. Nothing exists beyond this present moment.

 

[ForEverAfter]

Astronomers haven't been to the far reaches of space, but that doesn't mean they know as little as you or I.

God is unknowable

Some are closer to God than others.
On that, we can agree to disagree.

But, I don't see how you presume to know that God is utterly unknowable.
That implies that you know something about God (that He is utterly unknowable) and - frankly - I don't think you do know this.
Maybe what you mean is: you can't know everything about God?
In that case, I agree.

...

I've experienced something.
Just as astronomers experience things when they look through telescopes.
I don't use a telescope. I use my soul.

I don't care if you think I'm crazy.

If there is a God then that is its natural state

Again, how do you know?
I thought we can't know God?

But, you do, I guess... through, what, logic?
Perhaps - in the absence of telescopes - logic isn't the best tool to discover truth about distant galaxies.
Perhaps it's limited.

...

I said lonely was the wrong word.
And, yes, God experiences the full spectrum.
"Loneliness" (again: not the right word) is only part of it.
I am limited to human references, when I communicate, so (like everyone else) I can't help but "project".

I've experienced both sides of the spectrum.
Extreme joy and extreme sorrow / loneliness / fear.
This - I believe - is what people, historically, have interpreted as heaven and hell.

As someone who has experienced near death several times in my life, I still can't tell you what to expect.

I've had about a dozen near death experiences.
They become less confusing as you accumulate them.
But, I'm not going to presume tell anyone what to expect either.

why isn't here enough? Why does it even matter what God is or isn't? Isn't this moment enough, without a story?

If it doesn't matter, don't discuss it.
I could go into any number of threads and say "why does this matter"?
It matters to me, to some extent, and that's why I'm discussing it.

I don't understand the tone of your posts in this thread (and in others, sometimes). Your making a lot of assumptions and you're (ironically) contradicting yourself by presuming to know certain things about God (which I'm sure you'll justify) while at the same time telling me that god is unknowable and that we shouldn't presume to make any conclusions...?

 

[methamaniac]

I read recently that ascension is a bridging of the nothingness with the oneness. What bridging it means doesn't really make sense to me. Certainly, it we take it in the additive sense: 0 + 1 = 1. If we take it in the multiplicative sense 0 x 1 = 0. If we divide by zero we get an interesting paradox that is the basis for many types of higher math. I got a vague taste of what that could mean recently, but the confusion was overwhelming

The number one - mathematically - doesn't represent unity, or everything.
You should be working with zero and infinity, or zero and a singularity.
Or (see: Russel's paradox) the universal set versus the null set.

You really shouldn't be using the number 0 to represent "nothing" in that way either.
Sometimes philosophy and mathematics don't quite jibe.

e.g.
0={X} ; {Y}>0 <---> Y>X
Nothing is better than sex; masturbation is better than Nothing <---> therefore, masterbation is better than sex. ??
......
Sometimes you just have to accept the reason you can not solve something (and why it appears paradoxical ) is because you are missing (or prehaps misrepresenting) information. For example, what if I told you (meaning anyone) Russel's barber was a woman? Then you have no paradox.
(yes, I know that the paradox can be reworded, but you get the point)

1/0 =infinity (as often written) is not really saying 1 is equivalent to infinity (as Foreverafter pointed out)
It's just saying that 1 is infinity times greater than zero.
Or the porportion/percentage of 1:0 is infinite.
Infinity is still undefined with respect. Trying to correlate it to 0 is infinitely undefinable.

As far as trying to work with empty sets, I'd say you're not going to get very far in that respect either. { } assumes something, and this something is part of that which you are trying to prove. So you are forced to use/assume that which you are trying to prove, in order to prove your assumption. So the paradox remains.

I've wrestled with this before. I'm not familiar with "ascension" or what is meant by "bridging nothingness with oneness" , but I have experienced infinity. There is no way I could express it into words or numbers. I really don't see how anyone else could either.

I think it's complicated mathematically.
But, it can be explained fairly simply.

I'm not so sure about that

Perhaps everything is illusory.
In that sense, we are here and we are not here.

Everything can not be illusory or else no thing would exist. It makes no sense that an illusion would be sitting here debating on whether it was here or not. I believe in respect to me and you, there is a ghost in the machine. (at this present moment that is)
IMO dreams are more comparative to hallucinations.

They don't really exist, in the sense that they're illusory, but they do exist as part of you.

This makes more sense.

God is unknowable

This is actually a knowledge claim. I would have to ask you bow do you know this?

 

[Jabberwocky]

I'll agree to keep math out of it. It was the experience that mattered, and the mental concepts are playing catch up. I know Georg Cantor drove himself crazy pondering infinities and orders of infinities. I'm looking for the opposite experience. If you get anything from all this, it's not about levels of spiritual understanding or knowledge of math but rather that I took a detour into complexity and seeming paradox that was dangerous for the mind... I think. The fact that I experienced tremendous confusion during this experience was a sign I was on the wrong path. Yes, I was also on a strong dose of a dissociative. I had done hours of spiritual practices leading up to it and during it. I had quit many other addictions too leading up to it. All culminated towards something life changing, but perhaps crueler than need be.

I've gotten through many a difficult experience by reminding myself "I always chose the light". It's a theme for me, sorry to keep repeating it. Light to me is oneness. Undividedness if you will. Infinite but not in extent or time. Other names you'll agree or disagree with. Yet here I was experiencing the void. I felt I had to integrate that too. The void had fear of non-existence associated with it. Fear of non-creation. The pain was tremendous. Did I have to abandon the light now that I had at long last found it to experience the void? Anyways, that's my struggle, lived out loud for the benefit of discussion I suppose cause it ain't doing much for my ego. Oh well, when it seemed totally hopeless and desperate the heart kicked in. If that's all I learned from that it was worth it.

 

[ForEverAfter]

It makes no sense that an illusion would be sitting here debating on whether it was here or not.

Yet, you can debate it in a dream.
...and dreams are illusory.

 

[methamaniac]

I'll agree to keep math out of it. It was the experience that mattered, and the mental concepts are playing catch up. I know Georg Cantor drove himself crazy pondering infinities and orders of infinities.

Extreme obsessions can be harmful to one's health, I guess mathematics is no exception. A few mathematicians have checked themselves out after years of attempting to solve math problems (musings centering around the nature of infinity seems to be a reoccurent theme). In a way you could say they "overdosed on knowledge".?
I have a healthy obsession (preoccupation) for the nature of infinity (and mathematics in general), but I know when to give it a break.
Generally, the more you begin to understand the more you will want to understand even more. I tend to be overly obsessive at times, but I'm by no means overely skilled in mathematics- and in this respect it is a good thing. I'M happy/content at the level I'm at. ☺
I wouldn't go as far as to say ignorance is necessarily bliss, but it does seem a fair amount can keep one sane with respect.
The Infinite Book: A Short Guide to the Boundless, Timeless and Endless ... is a pretty good read if you're interested in the nature of infinity. Just take it slow if your "knowledge tolerance" in this area is low

I'm looking for the opposite experience. If you get anything from all this, it's not about levels of spiritual understanding or knowledge of math but rather that I took a detour into complexity and seeming paradox that was dangerous for the mind... I think. The fact that I experienced tremendous confusion during this experience was a sign I was on the wrong path.

Becareful going on a trip where you have no destination; you never know where you will end up.
When you're putting a jigsaw puzzle of an imaginative concept together, be prepared to be confused by your imagination quite a bit.

Yes, I was also on a strong dose of a dissociative.

These dissociative drugs help you think abstractly, but IMO the problem is you can't necessarily trust any of your thoughts while you are on them.

Light to me is oneness. Undividedness if you will. Infinite but not in extent or time. Other names you'll agree or disagree with. Yet here I was experiencing the void. I felt I had to integrate that too. The void had fear of non-existence associated with it. Fear of non-creation. The pain was tremendous. Did I have to abandon the light now that I had at long last found it to experience the void?

I don't personally like the discriptive term "oneness" in respect. I'm not saying I necessarily have a better term, but something about it just doesn't srtike my fancy. I prefer terms like "complete" or "absoluteness".
But I guess it's just a personal preference/thing.

Anyways, that's my struggle, lived out loud for the benefit of discussion I suppose cause it ain't doing much for my ego.

Maybe it is maybe it isn't. Point is don't let it get you down and just learn from it.

well, when it seemed totally hopeless and desperate the heart kicked in. If that's all I learned from that it was worth it.

Exactly

Yet, you can debate it in a dream.
...and dreams are illusory.

I would argue due to internal/external stimulus factor, dreams are more comparative with hallucinations than visual illusions; but the point being moot really doesn't change the fact that both are deceptive.

If you were high on shrooms and you saw what you believed to be an alien next to you getting ready to make a milkshake, you guys could argue over whether to make a chocolate or vanilla milkshake; but your debate over flavor doesn't do anything to prove that aliens exist.
Yes, you could argue " how do we know I or anything is really there/exists ", but at some point in life you just got to go with a reasonable assumption. Otherwise, you are conceding you really do not know anything.

 

[ForEverAfter]

Yes, you could argue " how do we know I or anything is really there/exists ", but at some point in life you just got to go with a reasonable assumption. Otherwise, you are conceding you really do not know anything.

Nobody does, really.
(I don't take anything for granted.)

dreams are more comparative with hallucinations than visual illusions

I didn't say visual illusions; I said illusory.
Both dreams and hallucinations are illusory.
Life - if it is illusory - is more like a dream, than a hallucination.

 

[methamaniac]

Nobody does, really.
(I don't take anything for granted.)

That sounds well and good, but
I can promise you that you don't live your life like you don't really know anything.
I would argue that you are taking it for granted right now that you possess knowledge.

I didn't say visual illusions; I said illusory.
Both dreams and hallucinations are illusory.

Yeah, all apologies...... I didn't mean to imply you necessarily said visual illusions. I was drawing an inference from "illusory" based on the context of : "we are here and we are not here". I can visually see I am here right now, and it would take a lot to convince me that I'm not. When you start digging into illusions, hallucinations, and dreams - there is a fundamental element of deception/misbelief.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/dreams-dreaming/#DreIll
(if you ever get bored)
But like I was saying in my last post, it doesn't really matter how we label things in respect; it's the misbelief that is significant.

Life- if it is illusory - is more like a dream, than a hallucination.

I tend to agree with this, however, I have had hallucinations that were more vivid and seemed more real than any dream I have ever had.

 

[ForEverAfter]

I can promise you that you don't live your life like you don't really know anything.
I would argue that you are taking it for granted right now that you possess knowledge.

I do live my life like that.
I do not take anything for granted.
I don't take for granted that knowledge, also, is anything but illusory.

I use knowledge (that is unavoidable) and I use toasters, but I don't take it for granted that what I'm experiencing is in any way connected to reality or that reality exists. (Just as the semi-lucid dreamer engages with dream people and touches dream things, while never committing fully to their existence.)

You often think you know more about me than you do.
I'm a very unusual person. I, honestly, don't take anything for granted.
Don't take it for granted that I do take things for granted.

I have had hallucinations that were more vivid and seemed more real than any dream I have ever had.

Me, too. I call them visions, rather than hallucinations.
They still aren't like life, though.

Dreams are often confused with real life.
Visions/hallucinations: not so much.

When you start digging into illusions, hallucinations, and dreams - there is a fundamental element of deception/misbelief... it doesn't really matter how we label things in respect; it's the misbelief that is significant.

Maybe everything you think you know is misbelief.
To say that something is false implies that you know (something about) the truth.
And, you don't... So, you shouldn't take it for granted that you do (or that there even is a truth).

 

[methamaniac]

I do live my life like that.
I do not take anything for granted.
I don't take for granted that knowledge, also, is anything but illusory.

So you would or wouldn't agree reality exists and it is at least possible to know something about it?

I use knowledge (that is unavoidable) and I use toasters, but I don't take it for granted that what I'm experiencing is in any way connected to reality or that reality exists. (Just as the semi-lucid dreamer engages with dream people and touches dream things, while never committing fully to their existence.)

Is what you are experiencing at this moment reality? If what you are experiencing at this very moment is not reality, what would you call it?

You often think you know more about me than you do.

That is a knowledge claim. You are claiming to have knowledge of what I think. You're taking it for granted that you know what I think about you, and that my actual knowledge is actually less than what I precieve it to be

I'm a very unusual person. I, honestly, don't take anything for granted.
Don't take it for granted that I do take things for granted.

I'm not doubting you think you don't take anything for granted. I'm just saying I don't see how anyone can really not assume at least some basic things are true without sufficient answers.

Me, too. I call them visions, rather than hallucinations.
They still aren't like life, though.

Dreams are often confused with real life.
Visions/hallucinations: not so much.

I tend to agree with the latter but not the former. Sometimes visions/hallucinations are considered to be more real than real life by those experiencing them.
I am one of those people that can attest to this.

Maybe everything you think you know is misbelief.

Could be, I conceded this a couple posts ago.
I'm just saying I don't live my life that way or have any good reason to believe it.

to say that something is false implies that you know (something about) the truth.
And, you don't... So, you shouldn't take it for granted that you do (or that there even is a truth).

Are you now denying that truth exists?
Or you can't make any rational/reasonable assumptions about what the fact of the matter is and what is not?

 

[ForEverAfter]

So you would or wouldn't agree reality exists and it is at least possible to know something about it?

Reality may be illusory. I don't take it for granted that it is not.

Is what you are experiencing at this moment reality? If what you are experiencing at this very moment is not reality, what would you call it?

It may not be but I would call it reality, regardless.

That is a knowledge claim. You are claiming to have knowledge of what I think.

Semantics. I'll rephrase: You often come across as if you know more about me than you do.

You're taking it for granted that you know what I think about you, and that my actual knowledge is actually less than what I precieve it to be

My language wasn't precise, I guess.
Although, I thought it was obviously opinionated (and not factual) because of the context.
Anyway... See: above.

I'm not doubting you think you don't take anything for granted. I'm just saying I don't see how anyone can really not assume at least some basic things are true without sufficient answers.

I don't understand this.
Why is it so inconceivable that some people don't assume that things are true?
I don't see how it affects anything, whether or not I'm absolutely convinced of anything.
Because it doesn't, and I'm not.

Sometimes visions/hallucinations are considered to be more real than real life by those experiencing them.
I am one of those people that can attest to this.

I think we're getting a bit lost, on the analogy.
Visions may be hyper real, but you don't confuse them for your life... that's what I was saying.
It's more common for people to mistake dreams for reality than hallucinations/visions.
The fact that you're describing visions as hyper real confirms this.

Are you now denying that truth exists?
Or you can't make any rational/reasonable assumptions about what the fact of the matter is and what is not?

You make assumptions without taking for granted that they are true.

 

[methamaniac]

^
Can you please define what you mean by "taking it for granted"?