What is non-existence?

[Danioover9000]

   I've been thinking about this for a while that kept me sometimes awake at nights, that if existence is everything it also includes obviously all things like life, death, forms, tangible things, non-tangible things, and so on until I hit at non-existence. I've previously passed off non-existence as like death, so their similar, until I realized that death is included in existence, and my thoughts on it are in existence, including thoughts about non-existence. If non-existence was a thing existing separate from existence, it would seem far more dangerous and problematic than death. By definition, if existence is everything, non-existence is non-everything, including not death, not life, non-forms, non-thoughts, and so on. Like if existence came up with something beautiful like a flower, then equally non-existence would cancel it out with an equal measure of creation as existence.

   Let me know what you thing.

[Someone here]

IMO Not every concept the mind can think of and put into words have  an equivalent or an actual representation in the world. Non-existence is a perfect example for that. Notice how it's impossible to give accurate definition for that term because it's self -contradictory.  Any definition you give it is by definition not it. Think about numbers for example.  Numbers like one and two and so on have an actual representation in the world (one orange or two oranges). But can you please show me a representation of the number zero?  Can you show me zero orange?? . Let alone the negative numbers and the imaginary numbers.  They have absolutely no actual existence except as abstract concepts. 

Edited May 15, 2020 by Someone here

[Danioover9000]

@Meta-Man Unity, life, death, real, unreal, existence, non-existence, distinctions, non-duality, awakening, collapse, and enlightenment are within EXISTENCE. Even as abstract concepts in the mind, that too occurs in existence, along with tangible things as well. Yet, ever wondered why, whenever we entertain the thought of non-existence, that non-existence doesn't just obliterate you, people around you, the world in a blink? To me, non-existence is much worse than death, because death is occurring within EXISTENCE, which is synonymous to everything, infinity, and God. Despite the various relative and degrees of death and dying, non-existence is much worse, because if you have existence as same as everything, unity, and god, what does that mean for non-existence?

@Someone here  Yet, you can have thoughts about abstract concepts, imaginary numbers, and experience tangible things within EXISTENCE, without getting obliterated to smithereens by non-existence. 

 

[Bulgarianspirit]

If non existence is imagined it's not real. Its just a definition in the mind... Also non existence doesn't exist by definition soo yeah enjoy eternity lol.

[Leo Gura]

Non-existence is a concept, which is existence.

[Someone here]

13 minutes ago, Danioover9000 said:

@Meta-Man

@Someone here  Yet, you can have thoughts about abstract concepts, imaginary numbers, and experience tangible things within EXISTENCE, without getting obliterated to smithereens by non-existence. 

 

Sorry I'm not quite sure what you mean. Could you rephrase? 

[Danioover9000]

@Bulgarianspirit

7 minutes ago, Bulgarianspirit said:

If non existence is imagined it's not real. Its just a definition in the mind... Also non existence doesn't exist by definition soo yeah enjoy eternity lol.

   You are saying that, with the benefit of God, somehow through infinite intelligence, made non-existence once a dangerous atomic bomb, now a dud.

[Danioover9000]

@Someone here

1 minute ago, Someone here said:

Sorry I'm not quite sure what you mean. Could you rephrase? 

   I meant that we could have thoughts and concepts within existence. Maybe I thought you meant concepts can't occur in existence. If that's what you meant, you're right, if in terms of physical objects and location as a basis for existing, but thought, despite being intangible and false compared to physical stuff, is still existing within existence. Same with non-existence, as a thought.

   The real pickle here is non-existence. If you're willing to say that existence is synonymous with everything, God and infinity, then you must also consider that non-existence is also synonymous with non-everything, non-god, and non-infinity. As a consequence, this means that if we had actual existing non-existence, that thing would be canceling every bit of creation, almost every step of the way. That would be far more damaging than death because with death there's always leeway for new forms to emerge from in life. That's not happening with non-existence, see?

   Yet somehow, we can safely think about non-existence. Why's that? Well, if God is infinity and has infinite intelligence, then god had plenty of time to struggle through every step it took to make sure this wouldn't be a problem in all creation, making it a dud in the minds of living creatures.

   Let's have a thought experiment. A simplified version of Zeus's mythology. There's once Uranus and Gaia, only two in all of existence. Uranus, the masculine aspect of existence, keeps making love with Gaia, the feminine aspect of existence. However, because there's nothing outside of Uranus to replenish his energy, he must eat almost every child Gaia gives birth to. Understandably fed up, Gaia at some point decides to deceive him and swap out her real baby for an imaginary one, saving Zeus. Hidden away by Gaia, and through time he grew stronger to eventually overthrow Uranus and become the new ruler and father to all other gods and goddesses after Zeus. However, Zeus, seeing his wife, pregnant with his child, realizes that he himself would suffer the same fate as his father Uranus, fully eats his wife and unborn child, achieving immortality.

   Now, Uranus and Gaia here would be an example of a prior existence, that somehow gave birth to actual non-existence, here as Zeus. Non-existence, because of it's canceling effect, nullifies the prior existences to the point it was only non-existence, which is so radically destructive it cancels itself out and some became EXISTENCE as an absolute and realizes through infinity that if this thing ever crops up again, it would do what it once did so long ago, and through whatever infinite intelligence and power, it made non-existence a dud, such a dud that you can think about it.

   That's my take, yours might differ. I hope I made some sense here.

   

    

[Danioover9000]

@Meta-Man

45 minutes ago, Meta-Man said:

@Danioover9000

Nothing = Everything

 

 

   Ok, but not the same as non-existence. Nothing and everything is within existence, yet nothing isn't like non-existence, because nothingness is within existence because you can experience it, in non-existence both the notion and actual nothingness would be canceled out, non-nothingness. As unbelievable as that sounds, it is possible that emptiness could be canceled out of existence by non-existence if it were not for the infinite intelligence of God and infinity making it powerless. Otherwise, you couldn't be able to have enlightenment occur or even think about enlightenment, because actual non-existence erases it at every level of existence possible or impossible, which means no spirituality possible at all. Imagine that! Spirituality wiped out from existence and memory. Yet here we are now, fortunate to think and do spirituality and experience life, no matter how our minds are, we still have a decent chance at them.

Edited May 15, 2020 by Danioover9000
mispelling

[Forestluv]

@Danioover9000 Rather than trying to define “non-existence”, perhaps you could explore it’s essence. For example, walk in nature and observe. . . Observe things that “sorta exist”? Observe the non-existence in existence and the existence in non-existence. 

[Someone here]

@Danioover9000

define "non-existence" please! 

[LastThursday]

@Danioover9000 what you're really talking about is logic and language and not reality. It's similar to this statement:

This statement is false.

The above statement is really one about non-existence. Yet, clearly the statement exists. In other words, there is only existence, but non-existence "exists" within it (as a logic construct).

If you're mathematically minded, existence is the Universal Set - it contains absolutely everything. You're worried about non-existence which should/would be everything outside the Universal Set. So existence contains everything - oh yeah, except, non-existence!

So how to get around the contradiction? Either you change the definition of existence to include non-existence (eh?). Or people cheat the contradiction by equating the two (folks love that here). In other words the Universal Set has no boundary (a non-duality if you like) - there is no "outside" of existence.

It's ok. Non-existence has already eaten you.

 

[Danioover9000]

 

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

Non-existence is a concept, which is existence.

   Ok, but I see no disagreement here because of non-existence as a concept does exist within EXISTENCE, as a thought. I'm talking about actual non-existence. Ok, God nullified it and we're just gazing at a dud and all we'll do at best is use parts of existence to understand parts of existence like concepts to try and understand something that will never be the genuine non-existence, right? Because the real thing is way too dangerous not just for me, but for everyone and every part of creation, so we're left with concepts of it.

[Nahm]

@Danioover9000

The very word is telling you very plainly that there is no such ‘thing’.  There isn’t non existence. That’s what the word means. There is no “it” in this case....because...it doesn’t exist. Notice, you’re not actually thinking about non existence, only the word, and then questioning if existence has an opposite. 

[Guru Fat Bastard]

If something is said to exist,then it must exist at all times and never be not-existent. If it is said to exist at one time,but then said to not exist at another,then it does not truly exist and /or have true existence. This is why the "waking" world is said to be a dream and/or illusory. The same for the "dream" world before deep sleep. In the waking state, the dream world of sleep does not exist,and in the dream  world of sleep,the waking world does not exist. In deep sleep, neither the waking world, nor the dream world exist. We also don't experience having a body or thought- active mind. So it can be said,that the body and mind are non existent also,as we don't experience them in deep sleep. We don't experience "ourselves" as a person,a human being,a gender,a race or nationality,a certain age or, as anything we conceptualize our selves to be. Yet,what is true or existent, is that which exists at all times and throughout wake,dream,and deep sleep. And can never be found to be non-existent.

[Exystem]

Taking nondualism seriously, there is always always a level obove/behind two complementary opposites which is in perfect union with itself, like a coin with its sides. You're kind of asking for the (complementary) opposite of existing, therefore assuming a level above/behind it, i guess.
Well, "nothing or non-existence" is the "by-definition-not-experiencable", so therefore the level above/behind existence and non-existence is also non-existent, because non-existence can already never be experienced.
So the very first level to be able to refer to is existence, it's the first "meaningful" level in every way.
Though its complementary opposite may be a wonderful analogy for our experience of life, because it represents infinite potential.

In another way, you (as the ego) are non-existent, you are the hole into which everything (all perceptions) flows.
If you search for this seperate entity, you will never find it. Past and future are non-existent, just a fiction.
But this is a non-existence of a particular thing on a particular level, not non-existence in general.

But now think about this: What if the conceptualization of the non-existentence may be gods process of creation?
Non-existence as an actual thing is per definition not true/existent. But potential non-existence of a particular thing is something to refer to (like a pink unicorn), which is a pointer from reality to something outside, which doesn't "really" exist but at least in the mind. As soon as there is something, one could always ask why it's this and not that. But not so with existence itself, it's self-evident that there needs to be something in order to be able to ask why there isn't nothing, or why isn't there a particular thing like...  But this potential non-existence of a particular thing could be gods inspiration.

So maybe that's what you're experiencing right now is gods "hmmm... Maybe there is something not existing, like believing to be a five-fingered and two-handed creature, reading a comment about myself and not realising that I'm actually the same since/for eternity!"
Nothing is behind the borders of existence and fits in every gap inbetween, so it's always existent in our minds, and may be existent as a concept in gods mind (and we are gods actualization of the conceptualization of particular non-existent things like "not-selves,others").

[Forestluv]

@Exystem Those are some nice exploratory descriptions. ? ? 

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, Danioover9000 said:

I'm talking about actual non-existence.

That's a concept.

Actually there is only existence.

[Jacobsrw]

@Danioover9000 Existence includes everything. That is, all possibilities. Non-existence is an idea stemmed from existence, it’s no more real than a thought. In fact, non-existence is a thought. No thought = no non-existence and just pure existence.

Not to mention, no one has ever experienced non-existence but assumes it to exist. To experience non-existence one would have to exist outside of it so as to validate it exists. Since one cannot do this it is a pure fallacy of mind.

Edited May 16, 2020 by Jacobsrw

[SoonHei]

@Danioover9000

What is non-existence?

It's the exact same thing as a square-circle.