63. Nothing is / and Everything?

To write about nothing is as difficult as to write about everything. In some sense both mean the same, in some sense one cannot exist without the other and in some sense both seems beyond the mind or limitations of logic. Within a set of limitations, nothing and everything seem to be two extremes of one set and outside the set of limitations both seem the same, indefinable and unthinkable.

How does one think of an absolute nothing? It seems there is nothing to think about. Similarly, how can one think about an absolute everything, as the thinker would already have to be part of everything, while thinking about everything, having to push the thinker outside of everything. Both are an impossibility. The impossibility is mostly about fitting this concept into logic. Logic can only deal with ‘something’ as if the basis of logic is limited to finiteness and these two define infiniteness which cannot be fitted into definitions of duality or limitations. It is more a case of a limited mind, trying to grasp the whole mind, which already includes the limited mind trying to grasp it.

Nothing and everything are two aspects of BEING. There is no 'thingness' to any form, as we think there should be. So, everything becomes every form including this form which we called this body-mind or me. When thingness to all forms are removed, from the mind, all things become nothing, and it is difficult to sense if all is a break up of forms ( like petals, sepals, stem etc for a flower) or is one single continuously changing form. In that case everything becomes one single form as no-thing. So everything is nothing except that it apparently seems so.
Nothing is the source of all 'things' whose intelligence is so high, that it has the capacity to make feel the thingness to form, to make an effect of everything that seems to be, or everything  that makes up the ‘seeming’ universe. The objective aspect of 'nothing' is this seeming universe, and the subjective form of this objective universe is 'Nothing' or 'Void'. It is not difficult to know it, but it is difficult to understand it. Knowing is direct and understanding is through mind. You know the taste, but cant understand what taste is.

Life is a paradox. By itself, it is not tangible and gives an idea of nothing tangible. The contents of life, which is its objective display, is a matter of everything. The limited understanding of ourselves, limits us to the limits of the skin and prevents us from feel of everything, as it should be. The mind has two roles to play, One is to know all that there is to know and the other is to focus on one part of the whole, as if only that was important for this instant. Since the importance of the mind, is on the focus, the focus becomes the importance of life and seem to get recorded  into memory. In this game, what is not focused is lost from being featured as part of the past or future. There is nothing to be done about the focus, other than to know its behaviour.

When we meditate, we wish to focus on one point or we concentrate on one thing, like an image of flame or sound of water trickle or centre of forehead or whatever. In case we manage to achieve such a focus, with thoughts not interfering with the focus, it is possible that, there would be a state in which we may dwell, where even that one focus is also lost. This amounts to focus on ‘nothing’. However the effect of this, is as if, all sounds, feelings etc.  are then simultaneously in focus. Focus on nothing then, seems to be focus on everything -as nothing is synonymous with everything, when finiteness is dissolved. If you are focusing on the waves and if all waves become still, then what you focus from then on, will be stillness as the Ocean itself. Letting go into nothing is like, getting let into everything. It is the ‘something’ that acts as a veil between nothing and everything.

Life is both nothing as a source and everything as its manifestation. Focus of mind on a limited apparent person, being limited to this body, is the separation that prevents wholeness from being felt, even when wholeness is all there is. Thoughts act like separators between the feel of nothing or everything, both meaning the same. The limit of nothing is everything and the limit of everything is nothing in a way. Nothing as ‘life’ is everything as ‘what is happening’ and that nothing and everything is what we are as ‘life’ and pretend to be, what we are not- as a limited person. But that pretence is not ours as a person, but of ‘life’ as wholeness, pretending to be a sum of trees, earth, and people etc.

We can have  examples like, wanting nothing is like having everything. The taste of an absolute  nothing, is the feel that there is nothing else required to be tasted, as if it is more pleasurable than having tasted everything in life. Man accumulates everything, trying to increase his happiness until it dawns upon him that all the happy zones that he accomplished were those, that depicted a want of nothing else for that duration that he seemed happy. The end of seeking for nothing is the end of the seeker seeking for nothing, by which time, he finds himself seemingly nothing and everything at the same time.

This is the paradox that life shows up, being nothing subjectively and being everything objectively, seeming different but ‘one’ or ‘none’ at source.  Absence of who we are wanting everything, is then felt as the presence of ‘what’ we are being nothing and the very basis of all that there is.
Heads and tails belong to the same coin. We concentrate on both aspects and miss out the coin that was showing both as merely its recognising features.
Its the same with Fullness and Emptiness. The glass always experiences fullness or emptiness what you call it, as both mean same to the glass, as a measure of capacity. What is part is only the contents. When space is included as a non-separate content, it is always either full or empty or both or neither because these aspects are limitations of the contents and not of the glass.