Search the Community

@perlita Because it’s hard to notice falsity as an illusion in an illusion of falsity. And because it matters, and doesn’t matter. Like, everyone is talking to other people and looking in their eyes, without ever noticing the eye never grows, and the center is empty nothingness, and as we look at eachother’s eyes, we’re seeing “pupils”. The pupils (students) that we all are, the emptiness / the one that we all are. The situation is too obvious and that’s how it is convincing. The Light is allowed by that there is “we”, and that “get’s accomplished” by empty pupils allowing the light. You know what I’m sayin? It’s just a reference, pointing to the obviousness of the entire situation.

Hi everyone, Leo’s Consciousness video hit me like a ton of bricks as I have been reflecting on similar concepts and related topics for a while. The realization that Consciousness is Nothingness, that is all around us and that Human consciousness is IN Cosmic consciousness are brilliant insights that shake up the foundations of my understanding. And it even raises more questions. As an Engineer, I have always wondered if we would ever be able to detect Consciousness in some way, and why we haven’t been able to do it to date. Perhaps it is because is an unfathomable feat (‘Nothingness’ can’t be measured), or because it is beyond our current state of technology and knowledge. Interestingly enough, it is proven by experts that the majority of the Universe (specifically 96% of it) is made of mysterious and invisible substances called dark matter and dark energy. This so-called “dark stuff” has not directly been observed, but its presence is implied in a variety of astrophysical observations and by the gravitational force it exerts (it is stated that dark matter and dark energy are non-baryonic in nature. Non-baryonic matter, unlike all the kinds of matter with which we are familiar, is not made of baryons and is possibly being composed of some as-yet undiscovered subatomic particles). The shocker here is that 96% of the Cosmos is made out of “dark stuff”, leaving only a small 4% for all the matter and energy we know and understand. Energy like light, heat, and X-rays, together with matter like people, cows, birds, planet Earth, the Sun, and all the galaxies. No need to say that dark matter and dark energy raise some of the biggest questions in the study of space and physics. Lots of scientists are using observations and math to figure out what these mysterious and invisible stuff is. Now coming back to Leo’s video… The Universe is Consciousness and we are IN Consciousness. Consciousness is all around us, but we can touch it, smell it or see it because Consciousness is made out of Nothingness. In the same way, the Universe is made 96% of “dark stuff” and we are living IN dark stuff. Dark stuff is all around us, but we can touch it, smell it or see it because it seems to be made out of Nothingness. As you can imagine my biggest questions are: What are the chances that both things are somehow related? What are the chances that “dark matter” or “dark energy” are the stuff Consciousness is made of? Could we dare to say that dark energy or dark matter are Consciousness itself? Quite bold assumptions here and unfortunately with nothing to back it up, but what do you guys think?

We count on conjecture and theory from lack of direct experience all the time. We’ve never been born back in history, yet we believe in those people who talk about World War II. Most of us have never been to Mount Everest, but we believe the famous people who say they have. Most of us aren’t scientists working with the Hadron Collider, but we believe them as the experts. So much of everything we believe is just from other people. This is what removing the ego is. Letting go of what isn’t directly experienced and believing what is really there. And in there, there’s nothingness. Only from nothingness do we know what something is, and so we have a framework to compare our beliefs to something entirely without assumptions.

I have posted this before. Explains the a little about the nature of experience... Originally, experience means to go through with/to end.... To not carry experience over as a projection onto the present movement experiencing. But that is not what we do. We cling to experience and project forward onto the “dynamic now” When this is the case, all present experience implies “the accumulation of the past, “knowledge/memory”, and that recollection is then projected in the form of a new experience. But that experience is not new if it is influenced by the accumulation of memory, knowledge, and past experiencings. Any movement as such is a movement of thought, no matter how much one feels thought was not in movement. If a experience is identified it is a movement of thought “the known” Any experience implies the movement of thought/the thinker. In this case the experience and experiencer are one in the same movement. When/If, the movement of experience “knowledge/memory, being static”, ceases to be carried over onto the dynamic now, “not recorded and therefore projected” then no content/movement of the self, “thinker/thought”, will be projected as an experience at all. If all that movement of self ceases to manifest, so does the experience/experiencer who experiences. Which implies there is no-body to identify with any-thing. The ultimate freedom. If there is no such dualistic movement of thought taking place then that implies whole action that is not divisive and fragmented by a center/ego/thought..... This implies that the center “the i” is not. This is what is considered “ONENESS/NON-DUAL”... In this all movement ‘without’ such dualistic action implies whole action, complete action, the action of truth. Infinite, absolute, immeasurable. WHEN THIS DUALISTIC MOVEMENT CEASES, THAT IS THE ACTION OF TRUTH ITSELF. THIS IS EMBODIMENT OF TRUTH, AND MAY BE REFERED TO AS THE INFINITE, ABSOLUTE, THE IMMEASURABLE. BUT THERE IS NO IDENTIFICATION/EXPERIENCE OF SUCH IMMENSE ENERGY. CENTERLESSNESS IMPLIES NOTHINGNESS AND NOTHINGNESS IMPLIES THE ABSENCE OF IDENTIFICATION/EXPERIENCE THE ENDING OF TIME.

@Betterself Yes, you are alone. As God. Nonduality means there cannot be any "other" who is not you. The deepest levels of nonduality can make you start to feel lonely, as you realize that you created this entire dream all by yourself and the illusion of "otherness" gets shattered. It can feel very solipsistic, but also, as the mind adjusts to your new understanding, the loneliness should dissipate. I do not exist. You created this forum to entertain yourself. And here you are reading all these posts that you yourself wrote to yourself. Seeking advice from "others" who are really just yourself. Try to see the beauty of that. Aloneness and connection are ONE. You can look at it like the glass is half empty, or the glass is half full. By being everyone, you are infinitely connected to everyone. You still haven't surrendered fully to nonduality. Yes, it's very radical and scary to surrender fully to it. The truth is radical beyond words. Your fear of being totally alone is precisely what you must explore and ultimately surrender. The ego-mind hates it of course and will be resistant, trying to anchor itself into something, anything to avoid Absolute Nothingness and Total ONENESS.

Of course I have heard about deities ( your spelling is wrong) and multiple gods, the question is - In all pantheistic systems , why to use God and existence interchangeably . Well, to be fair pantheism is exactly the belief that God and existence are the same thing so that is why those two words are being used interchangeably, but I was talking about pantheistic systems like this actualized.org, whose sole agenda is not to convince people that God is not the christian God but existence (which is the agenda of pantheism) but the sole purpose of actualized.org is to show and make understand the true nature of reality, and the non-material core of reality. In all this picture, why to speak of it as God? Why not just stick with nothingeness? Why to say- God is existence? That is not a useful sentence, as it only describes the nature of God , but we are not interested in God, we are interested in the nature of reality. The useful sentence is- Existence is nothingness. Existence is immateriality, consciousness. The goal of actualized.org is not to realize God (as it is in no way a religious organization that believes in God) , it's goal is to realize the true nature of existence so as to bring about a radical positive transformation in an individual's life which allows him to live an extraordinary life (which is what it's true goal is). Secondly, I asked - IF existence is god, why to call God God and not call God existence (which as I have already said , I was talking in the context of pantheistic system) and you said because there are multiple gods?Seriously? Because there ARE multiple gods, god is called god? So it is obvious? Well yes it is obvious IF just like you I was also believing that there ARE multiple Gods, but what is fascinating is how you cannot see that here in actualized.org, most people are not believers in the existence of multiple gods, most are believer in god= existence, so why do you think that just like you everyone is a believer in multiple gods (specially in this place)? Yes it would be obvious that God is called God if people believed in MULTIPLE gods ( let alone ONE), but how is it not obvious to you that here in actualized.org most people do not hold that belief? 1st question to you - Do you believe that multiple gods exist? Why? Second question - If yes, what the hell are you doing here if you don't even know the basic premise that this website is founded upon?

of course, Leo should look beyond his own interpretations of his experience, and beyond infinity infinity has no absolute, and has no ground. groundless and empty as Leo says. while true ground of all, true absolute, actual God of monotheism, Allah/Elohim/Christian God, True God transcends infinity itself thats the biggest mind twist, especially for nonduality folks and alive infinite intelligence that Leo tripped to, is not really a God of monotheism it is what Sufis call as Universal Being, or Universal Soul, or Self-unfolding Being or just big SELF also known as Adam Kadmon in Kabbala think about it, you just trip and arrive to godhead, who is actually just a bored intelligence with human qualities and its not even clear whether he is alive or dead. whether you can call him god or just a dead reality what kind of god is this? god with existential boredom? nothingness whatsoever? empty awareness field? infinite machine of infinite possibilities? is it god or is it some mechanic calculator? can you intuit that there are inconsistencies here brahman = atman. but brahman is not God that transcends infinity. brahman is the name for impersonal aspect of this reality, which is maybe dead maybe alive, maybe dream maybe real, maybe this maybe that, utter nonduality however pretty nondual picture only applies to this reality, but it fails when you recognise that your witnessing of the here and now, is not simply equal to reality but its rather pointing to absence of the real subject in the reality, it points to absence of actually real thing in this infinite reality. coz actually real and true is beyond this infinity. absolute truth is not infinity, or being, absolute truth totally transcends infinity, and you can't trip to it, in other words creator and creation are not in nondual bowl, they are not the same thing. absence of the real subject in this reality points to that real subject does not exist in this infinite reality, real subject transcends infinity so its not true to equate all old gods into the same god, all religions into all being about same thing, archaic paradigms of pantheism and monism to monotheism based on revelations, all mystical schools into the same thing, all notions into one undifferentiated bowl of oneness, and think that this undifferentiated bowl of maybe alive maybe dead reality is the absolute truth that people pray to? and consider as holy? praying to dead consciousness? to infinite machine with existential boredom? can you see that its not so simple my friends. but in the same time its all much more simple than we think it is, and 'deluded' religions who followed prophetic revelations understood it much better than us modern-time sages, not just conceptually but also experientially, because only messengers who had message from Absolute Truth could taught you how do you form relationship, binding (religare) with Absolute Truth, God. and your reliance upon your own techniques or own understanding can only take you to merging with brahman. do you really think that Jesus or Muhammad did what they did just so you can merge with dead brahman intuition can sense things that actual direct experience cannot. actually, intuition is more real than experience, or than perception. and ur intuition probably sense that something isn't correct about this, and your experience of god might probably been tricking your understanding of the map of the territory human-being is reflection or projection of this universal being (Adam kadmon), its an archetype of reality, thats why you are one with it, thats why Leo sense that he is it, and it is him. of course reality is infinite mirrors all referring to each other, thats why its all relative, because absolute is simply not in this reality true God is witness of this reality/infinity, but his essence is not here, he is not 'what is', his essence transcends 'what is'. God is what isn't, his absence in this reality actually points to him existing outside of this reality, when mystics say God is everything they confuse realisation of him witnessing everything with his actual essence being in everything, but we can't say that his essence is in this reality, coz its totally different from this infinite reality, Sufism had this debates between various schools and resolved this misunderstanding long time ago, Sufism has term called 'monotheism of witness', which means that being is all one, while Allah is witness of being, and actual essence of God transcends being our infinity and this infinite intelligence is probably like a tiny toy in his 'hands' maybe this whole thing of misunderstanding god is the obstacle towards your enlightenment. so Leo, I believe in you but I carefully follow Leo's growth, and it is very interesting to watch, because he brings lots of interesting stuff, even if I don't agree with him about God. coz without Leo i would still be studying all the things like nonduality that he studied for us, so without Leo i wouldn't come even close to anything, but now i wish to repay Leo, so that this maybe will boost his progress. he is great in investigating reality, but i hope there will be time when he will start to investigate about what can be outside of 'all there is'

Hmmm. That's a tough one. I want to say yes, but I feel like this might be one of those hidden meaning posts lol I feel like these are all things we are introduced to as children, with the exception of the nothingness, emptiness, and timelessness. But as we grow up and go through many different types of experiences, we learn more about ourselves and are able to then refine these qualities because we are now aware of them being there and needing to be nurtured.

Can creativity be cultivated? Can love be cultivated? Can nothingness be cultivated? Can emptiness be cultivated? Can that which is timeless be cultivated?

Arguement 1- Inference from medical cases The brain is such a squishy substance. It can be held on ones hand, and can be touched , and seen and smelled and what not, just like a football or a volleyball. Both objects come under the category of 'touchable'. But when something happens to the brain of an organism, the entire functioning of the organism changes. This is a well known fact. There is the cerebellum which if it gets damaged there is no motor activity. There is an area in the brain called broca's area which if it gets damaged you won't be able to speak. Damage to some other areas leads to inability to read, or understand. Damage to medulla oblangata might end your life then and there. But no matter how much we talk about these squishy areas in the brain which influences the various functioning of the organism, what doesn't ever change is the nothingness that lies behind them. For example there was a guy who had a rod rammed up through his head (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phineas_Gage) and even that guy had consciousness, may be a very low quality consciousness but still consciousness it is. The damage to the brain did change the quality and the complexity of the consciousness, but it didn't change the fact that he had lost no consciousness or more precisely the 'nothingness. You can have a high quality consciousness, or a low quality consciousness, you can be high as a kite or in a vegetable state like in coma, but the 'nothingness' simply never goes away. You can hypothetically think of a person who was born blind, couldn't feel anything or touch anything, couldn't move, couldn't hear, couldn't taste nothing, only his vital functions were working. Now, what would this person feel like? The person is completely barred from the contents of reality. He has no means to react to even the slightest modification in reality. What would his consciousness look like? A completely null void. And that is the ultimate substrate of all existence. Argument 2- Evolutionary history of consciousness You do have the knowledge of the complex experience of being a human. Now think of lesser form, what about hippos? They are not capable of doing higher cognition. They just eat, and breed and die. What about insects? Look at their brain. It's almost negligible. So their experience is less richer than that of mammals. Now look at poriferans. They are just attached to a substratum until all their cells disintegrate. They don't have eyes, they don't walk. Water comes in and goes out through them and that is how they get their nutrients. They have no nervous system, nothing at all. As you can see, their consciousness must be nearer to that of nothingness, as they have no systems to absorb those experience from reality. All right , now think of amoeba and bacteria. They are like 98% water, just a bit of ions and organic molecules floating around , they are like very tiny minsicule drop of water. And yet they can reproduce , they can produce toxins and so on, so even in them there is a consciousness, which is even nearer to nothingness because they are even more simple. From a long chain of evolutionary history, the human brain has developed which has helped to make the interaction of the human organism with it's immediate reality, more richer. But this long chain of evolutionary history shows the source of the ultimate basis of life and consciousness, moving more and more towards a simpler consciousness thus more and more towards nothingness. And that is the ultimate reality. Our brain is complex enough to keep us distracting with the modifications of reality and hence toward a continuous bondage of suffering, but if we can keep on peeling off this complexity, and keep directing our consciousness towards a more and more simpler form, we too can experience the non-existence of existence. Argument 3- examining the molecular nature of matter So yes, it is true that the brain has our experience richer, but what subtends the brain? What is holding the brain? What is the substance of the brain? Neurons? A collection of neurons? Sodium moving in and potassium moving out through the neurons of the brain in response to the stimuli picked up by the sensory organs? Well yes it has created the experience but where do these ions come from? Where do these neuronal cells come from? They are just a collection of specific proteins and carbohydrates, and what are these proteins? Just a bunch of amino acids. What are these amino acids? Just a bunch of nitrogenous compounds made up of nitrogen and hydrogen atoms and what do these atoms contain? You guessed it. NOTHINGNESS!

Hey Leo! Your confusion at the end I think is because you use the words 'consciousness' and 'awareness' interchangeably. Yes, it's all made up of 'no-'thing'ness/ a substance that can be anything/consciousness, if you will. Awareness, however, I see as "how accurate you see what IS, as it is; how much CLARITY one has. Why you struggled to explain 'How can they be different levels of consciousness?', is because you give both words the same meaning. Consciousness/no-thingness is the substance. Awareness, is the degree of accurate perception you have of reality, of existence, of the 'cosmic Magic!', if you will. Now THAT is what can be developed! 'Awareness', your clarity, not 'Consciousness'. The substance of which it (existence/creation/reality) is made just is what it is; there is no levels to that, only to Clarity/Awareness. How vigilant are you? How much are you aware of? Also, only certain 'entities', created by this 'substance'/consciousness/nothingness, has the attributes, the capacity, to become aware; Like our entity the 'human being'. A rock, on the other hand, doesn't have the attributes.

2 cells out of the blue got bored in infinite time and decided to merge together, creating complicated cells and bacteria which created evolution, this all came from a giant rock (earth) which came form the big bang which came from nothingness/consciousness, existence itself, everything is one thing. Thats why they say "given enough time anything is possible".

In Leos latest video on consciousness he says that consciousness has to be completely empty without any qualities/attributes. Because if consciousness was big lets say, if 'big' was a fundamental quality or attribute, then it couldn't take the form of the opposite attribute, 'small' that is. So consciousness is completely empty, without any qualities or attributes, therefore it is NOTHING. But it is not nothing in a conventional mening in a way that it doesn't exist, because it does exist! And here comes my question, isn't 'existence' a quality in itself? If so, then consciousness is nothingness with ONE quality/attribute, namely the attribute that it exist So, consciousness can't take the opposite form to that attribute, it can't be non existing. And if consciousness can't cease to exist, is it really totally free and infinite then?? We as humans are free to cease to exist(suicide), the same can't be said for consciousness, it lacks that freedom, since consciousness with its only attribute is what is prior to everything and something fundamental that never change, IT IS, and can never turn itself into non existence? Hence no ultimate freedom?

@B_Naz Best thing to understand is that we must start closer to home. I mean don’t ever go beyond where one has not yet began. Learn about the nature of thought/self. That way you can avoid getting caught in self deception, (identification with ideas) The only way to end thought is to understand its whole movement and maintain religious awareness of that understanding. In that understanding and awareness makes for the cessation of experience acting as a barrier between the conditioned mind and nothingness. The art of living?

Basically, it means awareness. It's the intellects inferred description, if you will, of the indescribable. Anyway, then BE reality. That's the point. Have you had any spiritual epiphanies yet? If so, have you gained self-knowledge from the experience? Self- knowledge can be gained without an epiphany though, by using a teaching, such as Vedanta. The self-knowledge I'm referring to is that you are actually awareness (or nothingness), not the apparent person you have thought you were and what that means.

TL:DR version: Focus/awareness/Consciousness is the only thing "known" to you in your present moment. And pure consciousness is emptiness/nothingness/Absence/Brahman, everything else is consciousnesse's illusion, the game of lila. This thing is literally a fucking super power this is what Sadhguru means when he says "Focus in one direction" and "pay attention and anything will yield to you", this is what "law of attraction is" all problems arise because our attention is always being stolen by useless unconscious stuff. No wonder people meditate 24/7, they're training their awareness to stay in blissfulness, no wonder the buddha did that, mastering the skill of focus. This is not about popping psychedelics and going on fun mystical trips, spirituality is self mastery, psychedelics might be useful to someone who's stuck on common ego, but all these psychedelics user seem to want to trip the rest of their entire lives, that's bullshit, sounds like another addiction. Like Eckhart Tolle said "maple syrup for the mind".

You only know very little, and what you know is what is in your direct experience right now in the moment, and you may only understand attributes to what is in your direct experience, the more you pay attention to it the more attributes you will come to know about it. "Faith = being in a place of not knowing, accepting what arises, Belief = the ego's way of labelling or controlling experience". Focus on the left hand you become the left hand, Focus on right the hand you become the right hand. Focus on the breath you become the breath. Focus on thoughts you become the thoughts. Focus on emotions you become the emotions. Focus on the pain you become the pain. Focus on another you become the other. Focus on existence you become existent (more alive/awake/present/in the moment). "The thing you are looking for is the thing that is looking" Unfocused with great intensity you become the nothingness/emptiness/silence/pure consciousness/ Samadhi, whatever. "You are looking through a small lens" To quieten down the mind they tell you to do the focus on breath meditation, actually they say you can't quieten the mind, you can only remove awareness from it. So basically you're just training where you place your awareness. To truly be one with the object/subject in your awareness the concept of "you" has to disappear, there must be no illusion of the self, there must be no self. "No one can pass the gateless gate, no one's mind has ever figured out how, and no one ever will, no one can pass the gateless gate... So. Be. No One." "There is no self that awakens, there is no you that awakens, what you are awakening from is the illusion of the separate self. From the dream of the limited you, to talk about it is meaningless there must be an actual cessation of the self to realize directly what it is, and once it is realized there is nothing that can be said about it, as soon as you say something you are back in the mind 'I've already said too much'." "Not that which the eye can see, but that whereby the eye can see: know that to be Brahman the eternal, and not what people here adore; Not that which the ear can hear, but that whereby the ear can hear: know that to be Brahman the eternal, and not what people here adore; Not that which speech can illuminate, but that by which speech can be illuminated: know that to be Brahman the eternal, and not what people here adore; Not that which the mind can think, but that whereby the mind can think: know that to be Brahman the eternal, and not what people here adore. The One Power that illumines everything and everyone is indivisible. It is the Ear behind the ears, Mind behind the mind, Speech behind speech, Vital Life behind life. The ears cannot hear it; it is what makes the ears hear. The eyes cannot see it; it is what makes the eyes see. You cannot speak about it; it is what makes you speak. The mind cannot imagine it; it is what makes the mind think. It is different from what all we know; yet it is not known either. Those who feel they know Him know Him not. Those who know that anything amenable to the senses is not Brahman, they know it best. When it is known as the innermost witness of all cognitions, whether sensation, perception or thought, then it is known. One who knows thus reaches immortality." Notice where you put focus/awareness is where things unravel? how you learn, how you get things done, notice how all unconscious activity is basically activity that robs your focus when you know it should be used elsewhere? "The degree to which a person has evolved or become enlightened is the degree to which one has gained the ability to adapt to each moment or to transmute the constantly changing human stream of circumstances, pain and pleasure into bliss."

After Enlightenment one is fully identified with the human nature and the being. Human Being is the gate of everything, including you the reader. If a human being fully identifies with nothingness, what we see as the whole universe outside of the human body/mind, then that human being dies, literally. So awakening is from inside out, not from outside of the body/mind (nothingness to in <human>). In itself, the body/mind of each of us is literally infinite, the direct hologram of everything else.

You are overlooking a very important point: that "you" is an illusion. After enlightenment, you're not identified with being human any more. Your identification shifted to Nothingness and therefore Everything. So there is nothing to improve because you are the whole universe in all its possible forms. How can you improve infinity? Infinity includes every possible state. So there's nowhere to run. Moreover, the concept of "improvement" only makes sense if you assume time exists. And at higher levels of consciousness, it doesn't. You become so present to the NOW that you cannot even conceptualize a future in which something could be better or worse. And of course the concepts "better" and "worse" are just judgments of the ego-mind to begin with.

I've heard Leo say that "ego death" and "physical death at the end of our lives" is the same thing. But then in other videos, he says "who knows what really happens", so which one is it Leo? Also, if we consider karma, our level of consciousness and how it transfers or unravels based on that, and if we look at the Tibetan Book of the Dead and see how this process could possibly unfold, then.....wouldn't it be best to do everything and anything that we possibly can during our life times to work on cleansing ourselves of our karma by increasing our levels of consciousness, healing our deep emotional traumas and striving to become Christ like. This of course is looking at this from the duality perspective, but how can consciousness all of a sudden become Nothingness, if say a person is living within a very rigid physical reality framework and has accumulated a lot of trauma? Wouldn't they not reincarnate if we are all reunited with Nothingness at the end of our "physical lives"? From a lot of my personal psychedelic experiences oh mushrooms and ayahuasca, there are just too many similarities to what they describe in the book of the dead. So then why is it that "it doesn't matter" what happens and what you do after you reach Enlightenment? Wouldn't you want to work on your "perspective" as a human being so you can end up in a better place after your body expires?

We can either accumulate knowledge by means of time which only continues as a movement of time. Or there can be a cessation of time all together. Time “any movement of self” cannot move to the timeless. Time must end. If time does not end, nothingness is a product of time, therefore is not nothingness.

Unless there is a cessation of thought in time one is speaking of nothingness as an idea “product of thought” To read and accumulate concepts, theories, and so on is the movement of thought imitating and identifying with some-THING. And only thought identifies and imitates. As long as thought is in movement one is bound by time, and nothingness is timeless. One cannot go beyond where one hasn’t yet began. Get rid of all traditional ideas, concepts, and theories about nothingness. As any description “of thought” is never what is actually described “what is”

@Leo Gura Funny, I just watched a video of sadhguru explaining the third eye, and he said that there are million different ways on how to move your energies to the third eye, or Ajna chakra, but to move your energies to the crown chakra, there are no ways at all. Only if you have your third eye open (so to speak), and after that jump into nothingness, your crown chakra opens. Well, again, different guru's use different rhetoric. I guess we just have to try these things ourselves and see what happens. I'll start doing the pranayama practice with my internal gaze between my eyebrows.

It’s important to understand that unless time/thought ends all talk of nothingness is a product of imagination. This has to do with my original post here about experience.

No i am understanding it, you are saying the blind man only understands the picture doesn't exist because someone tells him about the picture and he has a concept of him not being able to see it (existing). Or if someone loses all their senses except for the mind then they will only know that something doesn't exist because they have a memory or concept of having these senses before they had lost it, right? Why does nothingness = existence When non-existence = a concept. when nothingness and non-existence are practically the same thing in dictionary terms. Doesn't nothingness basically mean there's nothing there! it doesn't exist?! Why isn't it a paradox in both cases?