Search the Community

http://nautil.us/issue/16/nothingness/this-is-your-brain-on-silence Key points....... One of the researchers who’s examined this question is a Duke University regenerative biologist, Imke Kirste. Like Bernardi, Kirste wasn’t trying to study silence at all. In 2013, she was examining the effects of sounds in the brains of adult mice. Her experiment exposed four groups of mice to various auditory stimuli: music, baby mouse calls, white noise, and silence. She expected that baby mouse calls, as a form of communication, might prompt the development of new brain cells. Like Bernardi, she thought of silence as a control that wouldn’t produce an effect. As it turned out, even though all the sounds had short-term neurological effects, not one of them had a lasting impact. Yet to her great surprise, Kirste found that two hours of silence per day prompted cell development in the hippocampus, the brain region related to the formation of memory, involving the senses. This was deeply puzzling: The total absence of input was having a more pronounced effect than any sort of input tested. Here’s how Kirste made sense of the results. She knew that “environmental enrichment,” like the introduction of toys or fellow mice, encouraged the development of neurons because they challenged the brains of mice. Perhaps the total absence of sound may have been so artificial, she reasoned—so alarming, even—that it prompted a higher level of sensitivity or alertness in the mice. Neurogenesis could be an adaptive response to uncanny quiet. The growth of new cells in the brain doesn’t always have health benefits. But in this case, Kirste says that the cells seemed to become functioning neurons. “We saw that silence is really helping the new generated cells to differentiate into neurons, and integrate into the system.” ------ In 2001, Raichle and his colleagues published a seminal paper that defined a “default mode” of brain function—situated in the prefrontal cortex, active in cognitive actions—implying a “resting” brain is perpetually active, gathering and evaluating information. Focused attention, in fact, curtails this scanning activity. The default mode, Raichle and company argued, has “rather obvious evolutionary significance.” Detecting predators, for example, should happen automatically, and not require additional intention and energy. Follow-up research has shown the default mode is also enlisted in self-reflection. In 2013, in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, Joseph Moran and colleagues wrote the brain’s default mode network “is observed most closely during the psychological task of reflecting on one’s personalities and characteristics (self-reflection), rather than during self-recognition, thinking of the self-concept, or thinking about self-esteem, for example.” During this time when the brain rests quietly, wrote Moran and colleagues, our brains integrate external and internal information into “a conscious workspace.” Freedom from noise and goal-directed tasks, it appears, unites the quiet without and within, allowing our conscious workspace to do its thing, to weave ourselves into the world, to discover where we fit in. That’s the power of silence.

@Telepresent Great post, thank you! See the thing is, I think the I in that statement is secondary. It's unnecessary. The moment can exist just as it is without needing to project oneself into it. The focus of that statement is more on the Being aspect of it. "Am" implies present moment and exists without precept. Yeah, this is one of the things that I've thought about quite a bit. There is the illusory nature of time that includes past and present in its context. For example, a weather forecast may say that it will rain at 3 PM today, but that is not real, it is a prediction/projection. I can think about what I had for breakfast this morning, but again that is a memory which can only exist as a conceptualization. So then that leaves us with this moment, in which reality occurs. cetus56 brought up a great point that these are all actually snapshots that are strung together which I hadn't thought about before. But this idea of time becomes convoluted because I also have to think about the difference between what is real in the moment. An object is tangible, so we call it real. A thought is intangible, so it is not real. I can think about a microwave and conceptualize it, but I can't use that thought to heat my food. I need the real object to do that. I'm going off on a tangent again haha Because if you are clinging on to any one moment then that is already in the past. It is experiencing each thing without holding onto any one thing. This is exactly it. It got rid of unnecessary emotional baggage. More importantly it turned my actions from a means to an end to an end in and of themselves. By not being so attached to a vision of the future, I can focus more fully on what is right in front of me. I still have goals that I'm working towards, but I'm not as concerned about the fruits of the labor anymore. Well, I guess that is the next question that I have to focus on because it is essentially the same as asking, "what is reality?" All I can say about that is, reality just is. Hahah very unsatisfactory answer I'm sure, but I don't think there's any way to describe what is real. I can describe what the plant in front of me looks like, but anything I can say is only a concept. The plant is the truth in and of itself. To think about it another way, it is like the park bench scene in Good Will Hunting. Robin Williams' character says something along the lines of "you have read about the Sistine Chapel, but can you tell me what it smells like?" There is no description for reality. Nothing that can fully capture the essence of what is true. This is an excellent point. If we are holding that reality must be constant, then the only answer for that is a paradoxical one: nothing is constant. Everything changes. The only constant that can be is nothingness. Holy shit. Oh my. If everything is changing, then the only thing that is unchanging is nothing. Yeah, I think without realizing it that is exactly what I was trying to do.

No, please don't apologise: it's a heck of a wall to be knocking your head against! A biggie, and I'm not nearly through it myself. In a similar way, I'm knocking my head against "I", which is probably why I keep focusing on that part of the discussion! Probably they're related. The struggle I have with "I am" = the present moment is that there's still (in my head, at least) an implicit element of distillation/separation in the use of the word "I". Always a label, always an idea. But then it's pretty much impossible to write about without doing that, so... yeah... Have you addressed time at all? As in, have you clarified for yourself what time IS? What it actually is, versus what most people think it is? Again, being and thinking are very different things, and time resides almost entirely in memory and future projection. The reason I ask this is because Now means different things to different people, and I'm trying to gauge what your meaning/understanding/definition of Now is. I think a lot of people fall into Now being a moment in time (hence the question "how can we remain in the moment if it's always slipping away?") But I wonder if you've already dealt with that, seeing as you state: Once I recognised - really recognised - that my concept of future was imaginary, and my concept of past was memory and no longer real, I calmed a great deal. I wonder if you've done the same? However, there's a third note to hit: what is Now? What is the moment? I'm still batting that around and I'm happy to keep knocking ideas about, but alas can't give a quick answer! But let's look at a couple of things you've said. Great, cool: we have a constant, and we're calling it Now. What I'm investigating right now (no pun intended ) is "what is Now, and what is not Now?" It can be very easy to look around and go "well everything that's here/happening is now, isn't it?" But you've identified Now/the moment as a constant, and that means that almost everything (if not, in fact, everything you perceive) CANNOT BE THE CORE OF NOW, because they are all temporary. So - for me - it's a question of stripping away again: take away everything that arises and disappears, and what is left? (I recently started a thread called 'Energy' which addresses one of my thoughts about this) But to return to your very first question: Maybe I'm interpreting you wrongly, and you're actually ahead of the things I've just written, but if not I wonder whether asking if "nothingness" and this moment are the same thing, is putting the cart before the horse. One of the perennial issues I find in this work is a desire to understand, understand, understand: "is this that?", "oh, does that mean XYZ?" and so on. Questions that are very useful as a process of inquiry, BUT if you actually get given an answer, then things may halt in their tracks. I wonder here if you're asking this because you are striving to understand "nothingness"? Trying to define it? And if so, my only suggestion would be to focus on getting to the truth of what this moment is. Once you have the truth of it, you will know whether or not it is the same as "nothingness". And if not... well, there'll be a new question to ask!

The true self is that which exists beyond our 9-5 self. Sometimes also referred to it as pure being,, atman, soul ect. It seems to an essence of self as just a silent observer to pure awareness that exists beyond personal identification. When the mind and all it's noise is transcended, all that remains is pure awareness/emptiness for all things to arise within. Nothingness is a field that surrounds everything within the moment. This field can be experienced really strong after a deep meditation. Nothingness, pure awareness and existence within this moment are realized as one unified field. Each moment is a still or snapshot that is static. The illusion of time flowing from past to future is stills strung together, one after another like a movie reel that allow for change from one static moment to the next. *I understand that everything explained here is a conceptual framework, but sometimes it has to be digested by the conceptually thinking mind before it can be experienced directly. I do that often. BTW- "Zen Mind, Beginners Mind" is one of the first books I read about Zen. Good choice! "In the beginners mind there exists all possibilities".

@Natasha Sorry, but this interpretation of reality is quite ignorant and framed in superstitious fear. Again, if you had any capability with tension you would understand this (the ability to manage the degree of attraction and repulsion going on within a moment). The human mind is not "addicted" to objects, it's having an attractive chemistry with them to one degree or another, or a repulsive chemistry. It's not that your mind "can't deal" with "nothingness", it's that holding space or creating a vacuum has an attractive chemistry of it's own and the mind by itself doesn't have the traction to properly balance it. The difference between me and you is that I can choose the degree of space I hold and what I choose to attach to, so rather than just a vacuum, I have a porous boundary (that space/gap) that is also a dielectric material. This is mirrored in reality via capacitance with electromagnetism, including electric coils or spirals that exhibit mutual capacitance, which is partly why graves spiral dynamics model is dumb to me. What's the point of using a spiral if you don't incorporate mutual capacitance, synergy, and nested function? That model comes from a frame of replacement rather than associative synergy. You and people like you are trying to repel everything that our self-referential systems have an attractive chemistry with in order to hold that vacuum, which is why you call thoughts and beliefs illusions or think they're trying to "trick" you (and it's also why you fail to hold that vacuum with any degree of intense emotion. The charge creates a requirement for a higher degree of tensile resiliency.). Self-inquiry will only go so far without a commensurate level of tensile resiliency because the mind isn't strong enough to hold tensile contrast by itself. You don't build tensile resiliency with the mind, you do it through physical involvement and build it like a muscle. It's like a magnet and a metal, it takes a firm grip (self-restraint) to hold the metal from attaching to the magnet, the closer and more intense the charge of attractive chemistry is. When you don't even realize this ability exists you are left with faulty conclusions, distorted by extremes and lacking in nuance. Like I've said before, the mind or narrating/organizing mechanism is only one of 12 sub-systems I'm making use of at any given time. I have so many more things to interface with for direct experience. Also, your post above shows you still clearly don't understand the inter-relation between energy/dynamics/chaos/subjectivity and matter/structure/order/objectivity. That duality is at the very foundation of the fabric of our universe and understanding how that duality inter-relates, making it a trinity, is how a person truly becomes multi-dimensional and able to create for themselves. None of you so-called "enlightened" people know how to do that.

Will check out the link above, thanks You have to be wise enough not to get trapped in all this conceptualized business. Every move you make, every thought you have is just there to trick you. You're not located anywhere. The human mind is addicted to objects and it's addicted to space and visual imagery. What your mind cannot deal with is nothingness/ existential emptiness. In the video on existential self I linked above, Leo gives good pointers for self-inquiry: - Stop looking for objects, you're not an object. Any idea of an object is not you. - Stop trying to see or feel yourself. You cannot see or feel yourself. - Stop trying to experience yourself. You cannot experience yourself, because you are not an experience, you are the thing in which experience occurs. - Stop trying to locate yourself - that's all space thinking and is mind activity. So, recognize it for what it is and remember that's not what you are. You are what allows location to be even possible. - Open yourself up to the possibility that you're not a human being. You are Reality itself. As long as you're fully identified with this human body, you can't do proper self-inquiry. - Again, open yourself up to the possibility that you're not an object. Even if you think , Ok I'm not the body, but I'm some energy-spirit thing, or I have some kind of aura , or I'm 'software' of the mind, or whatever, you're still thinking of yourself fundamentally as an object and just substituting one object with another object. What's really radical to say is, Maybe I'm not even any of that. Maybe I'm completely different domain than objects. What could that domain even be? cos all I know is objects, no other domain have I ever experienced.' - Nothing is hidden. This thing I'm looking for is right here as an empty field of awareness. The true you is ALWAYS there - it was there before you were born and it will be there when your body dies. That's how PERMANENT it is. Our mind is filled with so many delusions, so many fantasies and ideas about what our true self is. You really have to let all that stuff go through a graduate purging process, which self-inquiry is designed to help us do.

@Atom I can understand where you are coming from as I too have had similar questions in the past. I know that feeling you get when you are concerned about something and its not widely talked about. Plus you are just being open and honest about what you are experiencing. I do not actually know where to start feedback. This "Rabbit Hole" is Fucking deep! You are not "crazy" , Everybody has their own unique experience and that includes you. People might be shocked at what you want to know because they haven't experienced it themselves or they might be shocked about what you are asking/telling. people might not believe you and its easier to call you crazy and dismiss the whole subject.- Many Religions teachings are the same/have contradictions. I believe Religions are a teaching of enlightenment but the problem is people do not understand WTF they are reading and then they puke their dogma on others. The Light of the body is the eye. Matthew 6:22-23 In all my research I have conducted I have realised there are many simularities between Kundalini and the bible. I am born Christian or grew up in a Christian family but I soon realised some mindfucking going on there, Thats where my journey started. This "Rabbit Hole" is Fucking deep! NEW age ... You might want to be cautious when stepping onto that stuff as there is alot of BS hanging there. 1. can you explain what to do when you get to the other dimensions/portals?.. When you get there, please let me know how it was and what have you seen 2. Are there any exercises/instructions to make your third eye more powerful and focused?.. Nutrition, organic foods. Check out Teal swan and Ralph smart on youtube, I have found that they have good info. also check out this guys videos. 3. Does this have anything to do with enlightenment? You will have to watch the videos above and find out. I will also advise you to watch Leo's enlightenment videos from the start. Going through the videos(if you listen carefully, it should answer your questions.) 4. Can others change stuff in your brain ie open and close abilities? (i feel all kinds of stuff poking around in there) You have control over what you believe and what you allow in your life. sensations are mostly your Third eye activating, unless Binural beats is a scam that turns your mind into a monkey, Just kidding. 5. Wheres yoda when you need him? Yoda is Within. Lastly; As a general rule in life, Fear is a indicator of where you must go in life. Dont believe everything you see on the net. Keep it simple. You can just by being part of this community become enlightened(with practice ofcourse) Simple Breathing Meditation and Mindfullness can help you to "nothingness" 6. Is this too much for this community to handle?

this idea of nothingness is the wrong concept to have about enlightenment, it did not come about from people who were enlightened, it came about from people who have never experienced enlightenment. they are merely speculating about something they know nothing about. its not about destroying the ego, its about functioning as the being of consciousness that we are without the body. the ego and desires of the flesh simply are in the back seat while consciousness is the driver. ego is not some entity it is the programing that you have programed yourself with and have allowed yourself to be programed with, part of it is your false belief system that you carry, also the desires of the flesh, and finally your warped perception of everything, this is ego. the only way this is overcome, or subdued is by taking up a different state of being which has more power than these things. that state of being will keep you in a state of reality, which comes before your ego, programing, false belief, and warped perception, it will also keep you in the moment of life with the ability to see reality and function without sequences and one has some measure of free will and choice, however that is limited in the respect that once self realized, the choices are made to remain in liberation, and not further enslavement to the human identity.

" " – Nothingness

I saw this video last night and I can't get my head to fully process the implications of the two parts of the brain acting without awareness of the other. Does this mean the nothingness we think we are is simply the other side of the brain? If so, does that completely undermine everything we have been learning with Leo as far as the nature of true self? And if that's true does it really matter as long as this stuff works anyways? I feel like my brain is a spoiled kid that packed up his toys and left; refusing to play anymore.

You are afraid to lose something implying you believe you have it, or you will have it. So long as you attach yourself to this belief I think it will be difficult enough to become enlightened. Motivation is lost when a mind tries to conceptualize nothingness. It concludes "if nothing exists then what's the point of doing anything" it's like paying for a movie ticket and then leaving the theatre because the movie will be over in a few hours anyway, what's the point in watching it at all? What you see as negative to your improvement is redundant. If you're afraid an awakening experience will change your mind, why would you want to do the thing your awakened self doesn't? Continue practice contributing to your growth and the others around you. Everything will happen exactly when it needs to.

spend some time considering the notion of infinity, like a philosopher would spend some time considering the notion of absolute nothingness what are their dimensions, what would they look like, what are their possibilities, what would the implications if they were real, where are they, how would they relate to your experience right now? can you imagine them, what do they feel like, can they be felt? can you touch it, can you imagine it, can you think of it, can you be it?

@Leo Gura That is the most explicit way to point us in the right direction! However, when moving towards the Nothingness, and becoming it, everything disappears. Yep! Struggling with wrapping my mind about the idea that Enlightenment vs Existence. Seems like paradox to me.

Nothingness I meant "Śūnyatā" (from wikipedia) Śūnyatā (Sanskrit; Pali: suññatā), translated into English as emptiness, voidness, openness, spaciousness, or vacuity, is a Buddhist concept which has multiple meanings depending on its doctrinal context. In Theravada Buddhism, suññatā often refers to the not-self (Pāli: anattā, Sanskrit: anātman) nature of the five aggregates of experience and the six sense spheres. Suññatā is also often used to refer to a meditative state or experience. Śūnyatā is a key term in Mahāyāna Buddhism, and also influenced some schools of Hindu philosophy.

Free will is an illusion, logically. You don't need to be enlightened to understand it. Your ego thinks the source (or nature, or the universe, GOD, the I AM, etc...) is just watching. He (the source) is doing everything. The concept of nothingness is not that there's nothing at all, it means that from nothing everything comes, and nothing and everything is all. So we are nothing and everything. But maybe I am wrong. I just wanted to add it so Leo corrects me if I am wrong.

If you are interested, you can read Bhagavat Gita "As it is" by Prabhupada. It is like Indian bible, but it has many interpretations. For example, Hare Krishna people believe that God is personal and beyond nothingness, which is was very appealing for me. But other issues of Bhagavat Gita see God as impersonal. Now I am fine, but I was very confused. I think most negative side affect was psychological suffering and social isolation also waste of time. But I try to be positive and learn from from my mistakes. Moreover, Hare Krishna movement is not that bad in other aspects. They don't use stimulants, live clean life and they could be bright and smart people, who want to help others, but the philosophy is very bad and close minded. If you have time and interest, you can study this material: http://www.ultimateselfrealization.com/ . You will get the idea.

Ahhhhh.. thank you Natasha! It becomes much more clear now. I wonder if the falling sensation I have in deep meditation is falling asleep or instead just the fear of nothingness. I'm done with this topic and know what to not-do. Thanks all.

i hate to be the one to tell you but you dont know about enlightenment or meditation, you just have a belief about it. forget this nothingness business, did you really expect to become self realized in two weeks. It is pointless because you dont understand it and if its pointless to you then it is because you have no desire for it. Based on what i have read from your text, your life is a mess, and honestly i don't think you are ready to except help for it from anyone because of your own belief system and a lack of desire to change.

@Extreme Z7 thank you but i already know abot enlightenment and meditation. i have started meditating then give up after two weeks, trying to grasp the nothingness and no realization happens. it just seems pointless...

A lot of people say a lot of things. The deepest truth I've extrapolated so far is Absolute Nothingness. Maybe there's something else to be found, I dunno, there's lots of different types of mystical experiences, but it doesn't seem that way from where I'm sitting. Things like soul, spirit, and even consciousness is not as deep a truth as Nothingness. Nothingness is beyond all mystical experience, beyond soul, beyond existence, beyond non-existence, beyond any thing whatsoever. And it seems like only the most hardcore and grounded people find it and speak of it accurately. But maybe I'm wrong. The problem is, that personal experiences of any kind, even if they are heavenly or otherworldly, are still experiences. And enlightenment is NOT an experience. Before you were born, there was no experience. But you were will still you. And you're still that you. And you will be that you after you die. But that you is nothing you can imagine or fathom. And it is not an experience.

You still suffer under the illusion that there is more than one it, nothingness, field of awareness - however you wanna call it. Think about this: How many things are in the world if you don't have your abstract thinking faculty to analyse it? If you just sense, just look. Without naming anything and without categorizing anything. What remains is it. The one big wiggle that is you, me, Jesus, Buddha, the door next to you, whatever. All these things were ever present and will be always here in one form or another. As your body dies and you go down, another body will grow up and trick himself into believing he is separate from this world. You don't have to prove anything here. Just observe. People die, people get born. That's the proof. So as long as there are people, there will be you in that form. Just like you are the wind, the dogs, the birds and anything else that happens. There is no soul to go from one place to the other. Show me that soul, and I show you the soul the reincarnates.

I'll let you know my thoughts on your questions 1. Enlightenment isn't really a state. It's the true being which has always been there, even when you are wrapped in your ego the most, the pure consciousness is still there looming in the background. But yes, one can be aligned with pure being while being awake and asleep all times. 2. No one should seek that state per se. But it's the end of all suffering and all, for most people there comes a time in their lives they are tired of the same loop of suffering/indulging over and over again. And it makes life so much more enjoyable being one with 'being' that there isn't really a reason not to become 'enlightened'. I think you are confusing thinking with ego. If you're enlightened does not mean you can't think anymore, yes it's our pragmatic use of symbols that differentiate us with wild animals, but a state of no mind does not mean there can't be any thoughts. It's just that the 'voice' is not your voice anymore. Thoughts just become thoughts, like the car you drive in is the car you drive in. You are not your car. And having an ego is not necessarily a bad thing, nothing is bad in the eyes of truth. It's just that being heavily attached to ego has the side effect of suffering, there's no escaping it. 3. When one becomes enlightened there isn't a 'you' anymore that wants anything. 'You' become nothingness/awareness/consciousness who is one the background being everything that comes into the awareness. That does not mean that the character you currently identify yourself as becomes a hermit that meditates all day in a cave. It just means that you release total control of the character and let it do what it is supposed to do. Whatever the outcome. there will be happiness guaranteed. Maybe the character becomes a successful businessman/yogi/artist/garbageman, it's not up for anyone to decide on this plane of reality. Really, there is no ultimate truth to 'Life purpose'. The purpose of life is just living it and trying to wrap that in one single purpose diminishes the exploratory and spontaneous nature of life. Life should be a constant flow of adventure, peace, love, discovery etc. all wrapped into one. But when you try to define life in a purpose, suffering and unhappiness will eventually ensue. 4. Why does it end? You probably haven't made the realization yet, it's not yet complete. Keep looking, you'll get it.

I had a conversation with my sister and we talked about philosophy and physics and that kind of stuff. And all of a sudden my sister she tells "she has it again" and she grasped (literally) the ground with her hands and her face made it obvious she had a scar eperience. And then she told that she sometismes feels that "she is nothing" and that she eperiences an "emptiness" and that it is really really scary and that she then always tries to focus on something different to stop this feeling. When I heard it seemed to match with wath leo tells about the "emptiness" and the "nothingness". And wich is even more, she tells it happens always when she asked "who am I"... She isn't into spirituality so to mee it seems like it is really a realisation she had and not a belief. She always suppressed it until now. So now my question is, whas this an enlightenment experience? And what should I tell her so she can expercience the beauty of it instead of the fear (from the ego). I already told her that such an experience could be positive because she becomes "one with reality" in that moment.. How should she deal with it the next time? What should I tell her to help her as much? I am pretty mind blown actually..

@Paul-from-France If you drive a car, you can look through the window as far as you like or can, but it`s not going to teach you anything about the power of the car. The senses are nothing but limited tools. To say because of that, we must be nothingness , is a short cut. It`s about making the distinction between the relative and the absolute; that`s where the neti-neti technique is about. So the proper questions are needed otherwise it`s a never ending story. A good example is astronomy. The further one looks the more complicate it becomes till one ends up with total nonsense. Same with the quantum mechanics. If you dive more into the senses the same will happen. It`s important to distinguish the relative and the absolute, the relative meaning everything that has a beginning will have an end also. The absolute being without beginning thus without end. And for the conclusion of being nothingness; I prefer being fullness!

Thanks Henri but enlightenment is not physics. I know it's a dead end street, this is just for the sake of argument. Still we can not deny that, hypothetically, if we had an amazing sense of sight acting in the largest spectrum for example, or even a crazier sixth sense whatever that would be, then there's no way to know what we could find out. Doesn't it sound too easy to say : we can not find ourselves through our senses (nor physics) therefore we must be nothingness ?