Theory of Everything - View Single Post

WithoutMe · **Much Ado About Nothing -** 03-20-2006, 12:23 PM

If anything (& hence everything) came from nothing, then there was a coming into being from Nothing, now if that is so, then it was not Nothing that was before anything came into being, coz Nothing is not being anything & if that comes into being, then it’s certainly not Nothing!!

So, the Nothing which really is Nothing cannot have the parameters of space or time, or having ant parameter would make it something, & if Nothing doesn’t have any parameter of space-time, then Nothing cant even evolve (coz it doesn’t have the time parameter) & Nothing cannot have any shape or form (coz it doesn’t have the space parameter)....

By saying: "Before there was anything, there was nothing.", one is fixing "nothing" to a time-period of "before anything", & how can nothing be fixed to a time, as for fixing anything, that thing to be fixed has to exist first & foremost, whereas if "nothing" exists, then it certainly is not "nothing", coz what exists is something & nothing is simply not something or anything.

What one may instead be saying is that -- instead of using the word "nothing", use the word "nothingness", as "nothingness" means "the property or the phenomenon of being no anything" & that certainly is not in any way same as "nothing"!!! I believe most people misplace the words "nothingness" with "nothing" -- the two may look similar, but are no way near each other.... oops!

Nothing is a point where there is neither self nor God as other, but a point wherein all things & no-things are just what they are. But nothing is not to be confused with the concept of nothingness, which is but “being nothing”. Being nothing means being something, where the something is nothing. The very concept of being preludes the concept of existence, but if nothing did exist, then it certainly is not nothing, because being itself will falsify itself. So, the nothing is not this nothing as compared to that nothing, or there nothing as compared to here nothing or, then nothing as compared to now nothing, for then it will but be a relative nothing. Relative nothing necessarily precedes & follows everything, because anything & everything exists between & within the boundary of a relative nothing, whereas the nothing is the nothing. Its merely is as it is & being that, it simply isn’t what it is.

As whatever we talk about has to be initially cognized to be of any sense to anyone, so the Nothing (which really is nothing) is beyond the existence of all there is; it is not (& cannot be) cognized by the mind as an idea or concept that can be talked about or expressed by any means. This is why any one can only give hints & clues regarding the nothing & not directly talk about it, for whenever it is talked about it ceases to be nothing & instead becomes the “being nothing” or what the Existentialists call “nothingness” (a.k.a. “relative nothing”).

Regards,
wM.

PS. The Nothing that truly is Nothing is not the Nothing that can be talked about….. I know, it sounds so similar to Lao Tzu’s saying on the Tao!!!

Infact the Nothing that truly is Nothing is not the Nothing that is Nothing, coz “being Nothing” is even being something!

	(#1 (permalink))
WithoutMe Green Belt Status: Offline Posts: 67 Thanks Given: 0 Thanked 0x in 0 Posts Join Date: Mar 2006 Rep Power: 10	Much Ado About Nothing - 03-20-2006, 12:23 PM If anything (& hence everything) came from nothing, then there was a coming into being from Nothing, now if that is so, then it was not Nothing that was before anything came into being, coz Nothing is not being anything & if that comes into being, then it’s certainly not Nothing!! So, the Nothing which really is Nothing cannot have the parameters of space or time, or having ant parameter would make it something, & if Nothing doesn’t have any parameter of space-time, then Nothing cant even evolve (coz it doesn’t have the time parameter) & Nothing cannot have any shape or form (coz it doesn’t have the space parameter).... By saying: "Before there was anything, there was nothing.", one is fixing "nothing" to a time-period of "before anything", & how can nothing be fixed to a time, as for fixing anything, that thing to be fixed has to exist first & foremost, whereas if "nothing" exists, then it certainly is not "nothing", coz what exists is something & nothing is simply not something or anything. What one may instead be saying is that -- instead of using the word "nothing", use the word "nothingness", as "nothingness" means "the property or the phenomenon of being no anything" & that certainly is not in any way same as "nothing"!!! I believe most people misplace the words "nothingness" with "nothing" -- the two may look similar, but are no way near each other.... oops! Nothing is a point where there is neither self nor God as other, but a point wherein all things & no-things are just what they are. But nothing is not to be confused with the concept of nothingness, which is but “being nothing”. Being nothing means being something, where the something is nothing. The very concept of being preludes the concept of existence, but if nothing did exist, then it certainly is not nothing, because being itself will falsify itself. So, the nothing is not this nothing as compared to that nothing, or there nothing as compared to here nothing or, then nothing as compared to now nothing, for then it will but be a relative nothing. Relative nothing necessarily precedes & follows everything, because anything & everything exists between & within the boundary of a relative nothing, whereas the nothing is the nothing. Its merely is as it is & being that, it simply isn’t what it is. As whatever we talk about has to be initially cognized to be of any sense to anyone, so the Nothing (which really is nothing) is beyond the existence of all there is; it is not (& cannot be) cognized by the mind as an idea or concept that can be talked about or expressed by any means. This is why any one can only give hints & clues regarding the nothing & not directly talk about it, for whenever it is talked about it ceases to be nothing & instead becomes the “being nothing” or what the Existentialists call “nothingness” (a.k.a. “relative nothing”). Regards, wM. PS. The Nothing that truly is Nothing is not the Nothing that can be talked about….. I know, it sounds so similar to Lao Tzu’s saying on the Tao!!! Infact the Nothing that truly is Nothing is not the Nothing that is Nothing, coz “being Nothing” is even being something!