What would be missing in ‘Nothingness’? If ‘All that Is’ Is all that Is, can anything really Be missing?
Contrarily we look for experiences because ‘Nothingness’ appears to be empty relative to our seeming needs. We also generate a lot of ‘have to haves’ by way of experience. Our definition of our ‘self’ happens to be a growing definition occluded by a lot of experiences. These are all limitiations self-imposed and reinforced moment-by-moment, on and on, in the broad conceptual experience called time.
Experiences and the holding on to experiences, are traps. Experiences define and limit us to ‘this’ and ‘that’. ‘This’ and ‘that’ are definitions that clearly limit ‘Us’. We then continue to seek more experiences with the definitions they provide, in an attempt to expand ourselves. Conversely, what happens is that we do not really expand Ourselves. We further limit Ourselves through an expanded limitation of definition.
Expansion through increasing limiting forms is not true expansion. It is more an accumulation of more forms. We trick Ourselves into ‘believing’ more forms, more stuff to accumulate, and more resume, is the ticket to true freedom from forms, ideas, and attachment to attachments.
Experiences are traps when we ‘have’ them. These ‘nouns’ are not moving when ‘experiencing’ finalizes it’s shift into ‘experience’. They are then set as ‘nouns’. Contrarily, ‘experiencing’, ideally, is always a verb never a noun. In other words, ‘experiencing’ does not really stop experiencing. If ‘experiencing’ were to stop then ‘it’ would not be ‘experiencing’. It would then become an ‘experience’ bound by the limitation called time.
Stopping ‘experiencing‘ would then become ‘owning’ an ‘experience’. Then the question becomes ‘who’ is owning ‘what’? All ‘that’ activity would be the creating of nouns, aka limitations; and faux owners of newly minted limitations.
Who we are Is ‘It’. This ‘It’ Is not a noun nor a limitation. This ‘It’ is a particular reference to ‘Being’ which has no limits relative to a typical noun. Being ‘It’ is unconditional and independent of any change as ‘It’ Is the Changeless.
This is where the limitation of language shows its limitation. Understanding does not take place in the ‘understanding’. The ‘Knowing’ is in the ‘not understanding’ of not knowing the presumed known. In other words, defining the ‘undefinable’ is not possible by definition. The futility of defining the ‘Ineffable’ (in this case) is an attempt to make an explicit verb a noun. ‘It’ won’t go there.
The inability to use methodology to define something is not enough to give it a dismissal. Because infinity cannot be put into a more convenient box does not preclude infinity from being infinity. It Is what It Is and ‘this’ is not a box-able noun.
There is nothing missing in ‘Nothingness’. ‘Nothingness’ is not a noun nor a ‘person’ having this verb called ‘Nothingness’. ‘Nothingness’ is full and complete without the help of a staid noun, concept, or box. Nothing can be added to something that is complete i.e. Nothingness.
We Are what Is happening. We cannot find Ourselves as ‘something’. We are the non-stop of Nothingness Being Nothingness Being everything without holding any appearance of appearance. Formlessness Is something without being anything. This is freedom. Be ‘That’ open -always limitless.