Month: June 2018

The “not this not that” principle is applicable to God once held to be wholly-other. Because to say, “God is wholly-other” isn’t to say anything at all. Like no matter what is claimed, it’ll be false.

Best perhaps to remain silent. Silence is not a non-answer. It is a recognition of the impossibility to imagine what God is like. It’s the “don’t know because can’t know” answer.

Something has been gained. It is as if the error “God is this and that” set ablaze has become the burning bush of truth.

It’s what happens when any image of God is found wanting. If this 4-D shebang world of colored blinking lights and motorcycle roars is compressed emptiness, why use it to draw a house of cards concept of God?

Imagine the void created from a nothingness of isn’t that never was. A sourceless emptiness without form, space, time or causal connection that then gets disturbed sending out shock waves of warp and woof space-time existence.

What exists appears substantive only because of the causal connection to emptiness. Since existence can be sourced back to emptiness but the void not back to God.

Without a void-God connection the metaphysical break between creator and creation is rock solid. If so, no true metaphysical knowledge of God is possible. God knowledge would be possible only if the creator and creation’s essence was shared.

If the essence isn’t shared, that’d make any notion of God two steps removed. How good could ideas borrowed from a sourceless creation squashed into a space-time existence be? Making silence itself the best possible definition for “God.”

Silence is the space between words. It is as much a word sound as broken silence word sounds. Breaking silence to create speech is not unlike breaking emptiness to create existence.

What if knowing or not isn’t a problem needing to be made such a fuss over. Concept are blown like mental soap bubbles floating up in the wind being chased down and popped by giggling grown-ups who’ve got too much time on their hands.

Splat…into a blank slate imagination wiped-clean of daring to ask whether God exists or doesn’t exit. Armed with the “don’t know” know ready to hold God isn’t a supreme being, non-being let alone becoming?

A respective pin pop for the theists who want to argue that God exists and another hole for atheists who’d like to torch the theists for that very belief.

Aware that the spring-loaded theist and atheist never look past their assumption laden noses when asking the question, “Does God exist?” The question that can’t be answered because the question itself is the problem.

An existential land-mine question that doesn’t take into account that “God” could be wholly-other. That God’s true nature is married to the “duh” factor.

Meaning if wholly-otherness is God’s nature, to get that is to finally get it. Where the clueless clue move might have suggested something awesome extra-ordinary had been tabled for discussion.

Not just mind-blowing but existence and emptiness-blowing too. Leaving the theist and atheist hands down rustling pockets deep searching for something profound to say.

Applying the “not this not that” operand to God suggests “is” and “isn’t” will never do. It suggests if God is wholly-other, whatever gets slapped on God won’t stick. That an open thinker’s mind is when the brains fall out.

Simply put, God is beyond the void.

Radical acceptance? It been said, “It is what it is.” This can sometimes mean, “This is the way it is and there’s not much that can done about it other than embrace it for what it is.” That being said, of course, in the face of wishing on wish things could be different than what’s happening.

So what is the way it is? Is it really that hard to accept? So hard that just to accept it makes it radical?

A good place to inquire might be to see what, if anything, is the tread that strings together the beads of our daily existence. There’s the basics like needing to breath, water, food and shelter. If that gets satisfied then comes the awareness that there’s no falling asleep at the wheel while trying to get home safely from work.

Look at the economic and political cultural support base needed to just supply the basics. Hospitals, grocery markets, police, education, government, courts, housing, military, religion, entertainment, on and on. Is there a single tread that thematically strings together these institutions in one word?

Could it be “death” in the sense of avoiding it prematurely? If so, why?

Maybe because like impermanence rules here? Making everything rooted and grounded in hanging on for as long as possible? Where praise is rightfully awarded if the fight was fought to the bitter end like there was no tomorrow. Because the principle conditions of being here for the most part is down right unacceptable?

Making radical acceptance hard-wired suspect right out of the box.

What if as an alternative to ponder arose that called the whole shooting match into question? Like everything that exists devolved as a form of compressed emptiness? Making whatever that exists subject to nonstop change. Where in order for anything to change a loss of some sort must occur?

What then is loss? Death! Oh…

Like this existence being a wave on an otherwise undisturbed ocean of emptiness. Where the thing about all waves is they rise and fall, come and go out because that nice pristine whatever just took a hit. Making any disturbance the loss of a an equanimity of balanced perfection.

What is loss? In short, trouble. The violation of a thing’s original nature.

If emptiness is that original pristine tranquility seems in order for existence to exist, emptiness must die. Making being here the void’s brouhaha if not the true name of the game.

Would it make sense if this world was devolved emptiness so it and all it contains might be considered the realm of death? With a little qualification, of course.

Where the goal of birth is death while death makes life possible. The reason being like all troubled water ripples don’t last forever. Waves start with a climatic bang dissipating over time.

Assuming this universe is the result of the void taking a hit, how could radical acceptance of impermanence help? Let’s suppose acceptance of the principle conditions of existence doesn’t mean giving-up on the pitched battle to remain here as long as possible. It could mean fighting smarter with better means resulting from greater awareness.

Imagine at conception granted a birth certificate in one hand and a death certificate in the other. Would that entail being better aligned with the way things are? Maybe doesn’t translate into “no worries” but how about less worries?

Might it then be easier to say if this wasn’t the way it is, this wouldn’t be happening? Why might that attitude be of value?

It could be if while the original emptiness needed to die in order for existence to exist makes the price of birth death, existence is like having a bargain basement sale when compared to never have been born at all.

Assuming there’s a difference between creating a new reality out of emptiness and creating the new reality the former would change nothing while the latter changes everything. That is because creating a new reality within the same context doesn’t alter something’s fundamental nature. Whereas changing the context itself to create something new should create it from the ground up.

Assume the void was created by a wholly other God out-of-nothing. Then the void’s emptiness got disturbed in such a way as to create a wave form known as this universe where changes made within would amount to a rearrangement of what already exists. Nothing fundamentally new would have transpired.

In order for something radically new to happen the context for its existence must change. That would mean a change in emptiness itself before it contracts into existence. If the void could be voided it might be like emptying emptiness itself resulting in a new kind of universe.

How might it be possible to void the void thereby emptying emptiness resulting in a new kind of reality? If the very nature of the void is to be void, then it should be possible if the void could be turned in upon itself causing it to void itself.

If the central theme of the original creation is impermanence meaning whatever exists has a beginning and end that’d make it spatially temporal. Because the duration of any thing’s existence is the time it takes to go spatially from its beginning starting point to its terminal end point. Duration defined spatially as the time it takes to move between two points.

This should mean whatever comes into existence including the universe itself is impermanent. Everything that begins must need come to an end when the start and finish points are different. The reason why is because when emptiness is disrupted a loss of what originally was occurs. Might say the void dies in order for existence to be born.

Compared to the original void whatever now exists would presumably be partial, flawed and terminal. The original void being lossless where existence is crunched emptiness.

That’s what emptiness means. The void is the is that is because the void isn’t anything yet. When the void becomes something it looses its empty nature.

This means new realities but not the new reality could be created in a realm devolved from emptiness. That’s why its been said, “There’s nothing new under the sun.” In order to create something fundamentally new the source of existence itself would first need to be changed.

What if the change was to void the void? What kind of new existence might arise?

A new world based on deathless change might result. An oxymoron if there ever was one because that’d mean no death when death is the very loss needed for anything to change.

When disturbance brings something into existence that disruption is temporal not unlike this expanding universe winding down after the big bang. In other words time is the linear duration it takes for a disturbance to subside. The high point at its start with the low point at its end.

If the void has always been without a beginning or end like an unbroken circle, the rounds of new existences would never cease. Nor could it be said that birth and death of something has ever taken place.

What exists would be the timeless ebb and flow of a new disturbances giving them an illusionary appearance. Illusionary because the void looses its wholeness as compressed emptiness.

Uncompressed losslessness as the original void unbounded without beginning or end is timeless, spaceless, formless and causeless. This seems to suggest nothing has come in and out of existence in actuality.

Sensory experience is still the void just devolved into something heard, seen, smelled, tasted and touched. A mere drop of existence in an otherwise infinite unbounded ocean of emptiness.

There’s thankfully another possible solution to the problem of existence’s impermanence. A way to “have your cake and eat it too.” A way existence isn’t terminal when it reaches its end point.

That way would be to void the void itself in such a way as to break the cyclic circle of existence’s coming in and going out. Then the start and end points would be the same point located in two different places.

Such a radically new existence arising from emptiness emptied would entail existence flowing in a linear fashion from start to finish. Yet restarting the moment the end was reached as if looping in an infinite manner. Change would still exist as duration between the time something came into existence and then dissipates.

In the former two scenarios on the one hand the start and finish points are different as in the case of a line making the end point terminal. In the case of an unbroken circle there is neither start nor finish to the endless cyclic movement meaning whatever comes into existence is as if unborn.

In the third possibility the broken circle has a start and finish to existence while acting as if it is cyclically unbroken. This is because the end and beginning points are the same bilocated point so the end point isn’t terminal when reached. This new endless end and beginningless beginning reality hatched from the egg of the original void having the grass parted horizon seen.

The void itself voided becoming the foundation for the new reality of perpetual deathless change. Dare to say magical in scope, nature and function as a possible third solution to the problem of impermanence.