*Reply to comments: Nothingness - A Prologue

Shot for the comments guys. They were great and worth replying to.

To backup Vinay’s point, which went like this:

“Just thinking or defining it already limits it. Thinking leads to question which connects to reason. We cannot even reason this one - it is as much a boggle as, how we came to be at all.I believe that the reasoning of nothing will drive one mad.”

Well, I must say that I remember one telling moment in 2006 when I went to the Nan Hua Buddhist monastery in Bronkhorstspruit. I was standing with my father and sister when I read a poster advertising a seminar that was to take place there. The whole agenda was about a world beyond reason and logic.

You see, many philosophers believe that the Greeks, especially Aristotle, were the founders of logic which is a method of thinking the entire world uses today. But this monk, I don’t recall his name, reckoned that there was a world beyond logic! This seemed absurd but worth researching. It turned out there was a world of thought that functioned beyond logic. Pre-Roman civilisations used it as a way of life. They defined it many ways. The Incas, the Ancient Chinese, Indians and even the Native American tribes followed this method of thought. They lived a naturalistic lifestyle, one that saw the trees as their brothers and the rivers as their mothers. It was a human, animalistic and earthly approach that they had.

And I must say we still have that within us. Not in that esoteric way, but in everyday life. Think about it, the biggest cities in the world are all built around some major natural resource. New York has the Atlantic which still acts as a natural passage between two continents. Chicago is based on Lake Michigan. London on the Thames. Cairo and Alexandra on the Nile. And let’s not even mention the plethora of major cities on the Mediterranean, from Barcelona to Marseille.

This thought process some cultures call love, others say instinct and for the enlightened, imagination. According to Hindu myth, the world is created through the imagination of Brahma and the first seeds of civilisation were laid through the love he experienced with a deer.

Perhaps this thought process is a sort of personal power and truth that lies not in enlightenment but in the capturing of the thought of nothingness. This can be seen in the Matrix trilogy, where Neo embarks upon a Campbellian hero’s journey to conquer the truth. And he does this in three steps. In part one he discovers that there is a realm beyond the one he knows. So he takes the bold step in accepting it, which in turn is accepting responsibility of himself and the human race. Then part two is sustenance, the Vishnu stage where he now strengthens himself for his inevitable demise, which is part three. This is where death takes place which ultimately leads to the rebirth of a new, transcendent being.

So ya, there might be a thought process which is probably higher than logic, a more primal method rooted in the very beginnings of the universe. And we always have to feed our roots if we are to grow. But logic has made its place in the world and if we, as social beings, want to survive in society then logic would have to be the dominant method.

Now to Amit’s great comment on him realising nothingness at the age of six. We all pondered such wondrous things when we were young. I, too, remember going to bed thinking about these things when I was around that age. I remember both Vinay mentioning they went through the same thoughts at that very age. It’s like Einstein believed. The most profound questions are asked at a very young age, between four and twelve, when we’re still live in the womb we call home. So when he was asked why he is such a genius at his ripe old age he simply said that he believed his mind grew slower than most people. So when “normal” people were asking questions about the stars and letting their imagination flow uncontrollably when they were six, he only started that process at twenty-one.
So he was slow and probably mentally dysfunctional to an extent. A perfect recipe for a genius, eh?

And to answer Jateen’s brilliant point. “One thing I am curious about though is that you say that you are not going to use this blog to air your opinions, but surely you have to some extent already done that in your post? Perhaps I am misinterpreting you?”

I must say, since I put up that notice about not using the blog as a soapbox, I’ve been harping on it. I was wondering whether I was contradicting myself and whether people might misinterpret me. By adding content to a blog I’m already stating an opinion and therefore opening myself up to scrutiny. But what I merely tried to state was that I’m not going to complain about social, political and other issues and make my opinion a rigid one. What I intend on doing is posting up questions in an essay form and get the readers to discuss possible answers, solutions or perhaps predictions.
I don’t see life as an unbending entity but as a free-flowing, evolving body that is open to any thought and welcomes new knowledge and wisdom.

So to make things less confusing I will change that message. But if I can’t come up with anything, then I will do what plenty of editors have told me to do when something just doesn’t fit. “Chuck it out.”

Will chat to you all soon. And remember, visit this page every week as I’ll try to update it that often.

Shamin.