Hermes is the Center for Philosophy, so here is a philosophical question I've been going around with ever since I first asked "What's life all about?"
Is it possible, that in reality, everything is ... Nothing!?
Let me explain (if I can) 😉 As a kid, I couldn't figure out how things could exist. The 
furthest I could try to answer it, was asking myself "What 'should' there be if existence seems so impossible?" My answer was that there shouldn't be anything, there should only be ... nothing. However, when I tried to think of what 'nothing' would be like, I could only think of 'something' ... like empty space or total blackness or whiteness. I couldn't envision Nothingness.
Then along came Unarius. Dr. Norman explained that everything was energy, that substance was illusionary, because there were no solids. He explained that there was no beginning and no ending in our timeless, space-less Infinite Universe. These characteristics would also be qualities of Nothingness except for the factor of motion which energy possesses. But when Cosmon said in his Relative Motion and the Vortex post that motion was also an illusion, it put me back on the trail.
So, since we know everything is Duality ... meaning there can't be an 'up' without a 'down', in/out, over/under, dark/light, etc., it seems logical then, that we can't have something without nothing. Which would mean all creation has been an evolution of Nothingness into something ... our Universe!
Sound possible? Would love to hear your thoughts ..... and don't give me you have Nothing to say;) ... Ken.
Submitted by: Ken on 08/13/2015
Add your Thoughts, Insights, or Comments below.
Tagged with: Cosmon Corner • Voice of Hermes
English
Afrikaans
Arabic
Bosnian
Chinese (Simplified)
Croatian
Czech
Dutch
Filipino
Finnish
French
Georgian
German
Greek
Haitian Creole
Hebrew
Hindi
Hungarian
Icelandic
Indonesian
Irish
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Nepali
Norwegian
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Punjabi
Romanian
Russian
Serbian
Slovak
Somali
Spanish
Sudanese
Swahili
Swedish
Thai
Turkish
Vietnamese
Zulu
Dear Brother Ken – I am very excited to see your post! How marvelous is it that it demonstrates that you are attending the same Higher Classroom on the Inner that is described by our beautiful sister Lesley in the ‘Who’s Who’ post! Roberto just called me last night to relate a very profound concept relating to your question which he said he will post soon! We discussed these revelations for over two hours, having great joy doing so. Then, I see your post – addressing the same concept that the Moderator repeatedly has talked about in the lessons.
For many months an almost continuous stream of concepts have been running through my consciousness about the true nature of reality , and relate specifically to the forms reality takes and the mechanisms the Infinite has set up as Dr Norman describes in the lessons. I am attempting to organize and integrate these concepts in part 2 of ‘Relative Motion and the Vortex’ post. Hopefully – with the Brothers help – I will be able to formulate what has been flooding through faster than I can keep up!! Please be patient, as the plate at present is quite full, but will be penned as planned as soon as possible.
Your posts, which opens the various discussions is taking full advantage of the purpose we are about! You are taking a vital part in our attempt to understand and begin to use what the Brothers have brought through the Moderator – which I am most grateful to you for your inner Light and inspiration! My most earnest Love and Light goes out to you!
Dear Cosmon,
As the saying goes, “The more you learn about something (like Unarius Teachings), the more Questions it produces!” It’s fun to explore those areas with the group here. In fact, where else could you? I look forward to Part 2 of Relative Motion and the Vortex. Thanks again for all your efforts in providing this site for us … L&L back at you … Ken.
In my mind there is not such thing as nothing. To me nothing is simply our lack of awareness of something.
The “something” being what has always and will always exist. We are just becoming aware of it through, my way of thinking, the polarity concept. We are polarizing our awareness from the Infinite which we are to the finite which is the opposite polarity. This full circle gives us the platform to move forward in our evolution to becoming a greater but more personalized part of this Infinity so that we being part of God can also be God ourselves.
That is just my quick thought on the matter. I look forward to hearing Cosmon’s response as well as others. It is certainly a vast subject that we could discuss for hours on end and have the greatest fun doing so.
Dear Gloria,
Thanks for your opinion. I agree it is a vast subject which we could go around with and have lots of fun. That’s an important part of this Infinite learning too! I also totally agree with your idea of polarizing our awareness with the Higher Consciousness in order to advance in our evolution … while of course enjoying our Infinite Trip!
Love and Light to you … Ken.
Greetings of Love and Light to those present,
I can’t believe in “Nothingness.” We are polarizing in the Infinite and become aware that physicality/mass is an illusion, but when we see beyond the physical, as we do when we see clairvoyantly, “something” still exists, and in my understanding that’s what forms/creates the physical stuff on the earth plane. Something creates the eyes that allow us to see whatever we see here and the consciousness that allows us to see into non-physical realms. I think that reality is All/Everything, even the physical that we call illusion, so perhaps there are no “illusions,” just a different experience of the Real/All/Everything. This earth plane is a necessary experience in our “existence, and I think that in our limitations here we attempt to explain All/Everything in limited language and concepts that make me tired!
Even in the space around me, the space between a desk and a wall behind it, the space between two people facing each other in conversation, “something” is there. “I think that “Nothing” can’t BE.
Need more Light! I know its coming!
Na’imah
Love and Light,
Dear Na’imah,
Thanks for your comments and thanks for the Light! As I mentioned to Gloria, I agree that we need to polarize our experiences, and as you said the earth plane is a necessary place for us to have those experiences. As we do, we become more aware of the Higher Energies and understandings from those dimensions.
The thing to me is, just like polarizing, it all works out to a form of balance. A ‘Zero’ level. I see that balance or zero base in so many things … numbers (zero base) … science (for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction …net zero), energy … (it can’t be created or destroyed, only changed … net zero). They all seem like clues 😉 Anyway, Love and light your way … Ken.
The concept of ‘Nothingness’ has apparently been around and debated ever since the 5th century B.C., where it was a popular topic of the Greek Philosophers. The consensus generally being that Nothingness can’t exist. It failed because there was no conceivable ‘bridge’ to evolve Nothing into Something.
Today, in light of Dr. Norman’s teachings and Cosmon’s posts we may have found that ‘bridge’. The twist which the old Philosophers couldn’t have known is that no bridge was needed because the ‘Somethings’ were still only forms of Nothing. The key, which the Lessons provide, is that all things are constructed of energy. Energy is made up of waveforms of motion ,,, spiraling movement which give the illusion of solidity. There is no substance … no-thing.
Now if ‘Nothing’ was water, and ‘Something’ was solid ice, it would be easier to conceive the oneness. Also, the Infinite’s Dual Nature of everything makes no-thing and some-thing … into one-thing. Conceptually, you can’t have ‘Nothing’, unless ‘Something’ exists!! Everything is tied together with its balancing opposites. (man/woman, heat/cold, good/bad, north/south, something/nothing, etc.)
Fortunately, whether we agree that everything is a construct form of Nothingness, or that only Something exists, and that Ken’s a loon ;)…. we are both temporally correct, and that’s the beauty of the Infinite!! Would love to hear any other possible theories. Love and Light to you all! … Ken.
Greetings Ken,
Loon? That’s ok….they can call me loon too. I’ll swim that lake with you because we know which side of that wave we’d be riding.
We know that energy can be manipulated into any form conceivable and has no limitations in that conceivability. It is only man that limits his ability to conceive how to manipulate energy. When you realize that everything is energy it gives a whole new perspective on what you conceive as solid and its form in different states of solidity. For instance, depending on how that waveform of energy oscillates it can give you the illusion of how dense that energy waveform will be or is to your perception, your attunement of that frequency. Whatever dimension you are in, you are manipulating that energy field around you to correspond with your level of understanding. You are also solidifying that position or your level of understanding by outside influences around you (your peers, teachers, parents, and so on) who only oscillate from their dimensional level of understanding or conceivability. So, on this earth world you call Earth, you manipulate energy to co-exist with your five physical senses that will make sense to you. Would you say that what you smell, taste, hear, touch and see are an illusion? The answer would be no to the novice, but if you take someone with a higher and more complete understanding of energy, that person would see that he creates through the manipulation of energy the illusions he needs for his so called survival at the level he finds himself until he connects with his true nature of who he is and leaves the illusion behind and births into his true energy form that melds with the intelligence of all energy in its highest form as one.
Space is occupied at all times, it is the different frequencies that people attune to that can give the illusion that it appears empty or full, light or dark, etc. Energy, energy, energy…..take ice cream or pudding, stick your finger in it and you will feel something surround that finger. You feel it because you have been conditioned through lifetime after lifetime to your physical senses to conceive this feeling as so and not give a thought elsewhere of what comprises this to be so. When you reach a point in your evolutionary progression and understanding of energy, you will see that very same pudding and ice cream as a living pulsating vortexual intelligent energy that had been manipulated to fulfill your need. That energy in its intelligence has rearranged its vibrational rate so that it could be manipulated to the creation it presents itself to you, and yet maintains the highest level of intelligence to the Infinite at all times.
Now put that same finger out in front of you. If you are awakened to your higher senses, you would see that you just displaced or moved around in that space your finger now occupies swirling, pulsating, flowing vortexual energy. Whatever frequency you are able to attune to, you can use that energy at that frequency level to create because we know that energy is intelligent. Let me put it this way. The average person at his or her level of understanding or juncture in their evolution may not yet be awakened to where they are able to tune into and see these Higher Frequncy Worlds yet or the energy that flows around and through themself. These Higher Worlds vibrate on a much higher frequency and therefore so too are the energies They use to create and maintain Their surrounding and needs. If you do not vibrate on those same frequencies you will not see these worlds, but they are there just the same in that space, and so on and so on. Energy as I have stated is intelligent and comes in an infinitesimal number of frequency ranges that can be tapped by an infinitesimal number of dimensional realms and the intelligences therein for whatever creative purpose or need be to the creator.
Love and Light Always,
Lesley
Dear Fellow Loon … er … Lesley,
I can’t really call you a loon after that posting! It was anything but third dimensional. You brought the topic into the higher levels of energy understanding (manipulation and manifestation) in a real way. I particularly liked trying the ice cream and pudding example … only I forgot to wipe my finger and saw only chocolate pudding swirls. 😉
What I also liked, was that you opened the door to another discussion which I would love to see developed here on the site. That is the topic of Energy and Creativity. Just how does this creativity thing work? … It’s funny but just as I asked this, I saw an Energy Spectrum where as frequency increases, one of the higher properties or manifestations is increased creativity. I’m not sure, but I imagine it must be something like that.
By the way, thanks for the swimming lesson! Well done! Love and Light to you always! …. Ken.
The concept that Ken is alluding to generally came from the early Greeks who debated this theory. I have reproduced some comments about what they thought – some ideas from the Eastern philosophies are included. However, what they were trying to figure out came from the attempt to understand the form of existence and reality along with the so-called void and how they came to be. As I stated earlier, we will address this concept along with others later. Ken’s meaning in his question (as I understand it) becomes the profound nature of the UNARIUS TEACHINGS – AND THAT IS WHY I REALLY appreciate his opening of this discussion.
Parmenides
One of the earliest western philosophers to consider nothing as a concept was Parmenides (5th century BC) who was a Greek philosopher of the monist school. He argued that “nothing” cannot exist by the following line of reasoning: To speak of a thing, one has to speak of a thing that exists. Since we can speak of a thing in the past, it must still exist (in some sense) now and from this concludes that there is no such thing as change. As a corollary, there can be no such things as coming-into-being, passing-out-of-being, or not-being.
Parmenides was taken seriously by other philosophers, influencing, for instance, Socrates and Plato. Aristotle gives Parmenides serious consideration but concludes; “Although these opinions seem to follow logically in a dialectical discussion, yet to believe them seems next door to madness when one considers the facts.”
Leucippus
Leucippus (early 5th century BC), one of the atomists, along with other philosophers of his time, made attempts to reconcile this with the everyday observation of motion and change. He accepted the monist position that there could be no motion without a void. The void is the opposite of being, it is not-being. On the other hand, a thing that exists is an absolute plenum (the whole of space regarded as being filled with matter – opposed to vacuum ). and there can be no motion in a plenum because it is completely full. But there is not one monolithic plenum, existence consists of a multiplicity of plenums. These are the invisibly small atoms of the atomists theory, later expanded more fully by Democritus (circa 460 BC – 370 BC). They are a necessary part of the theory to allow the void to exist between them. In this scenario macroscopic objects can come-into-being move through space and pass into not-being by means of the coming together and moving apart of their constituent atoms. The void must exist to allow this to happen or else the frozen world of Parmenides must be accepted.
Bertrand Russell points out that this does not exactly defeat the argument of Parmenides, but rather ignores it by taking the rather modern scientific position of starting with the observed data (motion etc.) and constructing a theory based on the data as opposed to Parmenides attempts to work from pure logic. Russell also observes that both sides were mistaken in believing that there can be no motion in a plenum, but arguably motion cannot start in a plenum. Cyril Bailey notes that Leucippus is the first to say that a thing (the void) might be real without being a body and points out the irony that this comes from a materialistic atomist. Leucippus is therefore the first to say that “nothing” has a reality attached to it.
Aristotle
Aristotle (384–322 BC) provided the classic escape from the logical problem posed by Parmenides by distinguishing things that are matter and things that are space. In this scenario, space is not “nothing”, but a receptacle in which objects of matter can be placed. The void (as “nothing”) is different from space and is removed from consideration.
This characterization of space reached its pinnacle with Isaac Newton who asserted the existence of absolute space. Interestingly, modern quantum theory agrees that space is not the void, there is the concept of quantum foam which still exists in the absence of all else, although Albert Einstein’s general relativity no longer agrees with Newton’s concept of an absolute space. René Descartes, on the other hand, returned to a Parmenides-like argument of denying the existence of space. For Descartes, there was matter, and there was extension of matter leaving no room for the existence of “nothing”.
The idea that space can actually be empty was generally still not accepted by philosophers who invoked arguments similar to the plenum reasoning. Although Descartes views on this were challenged by Blaise Pascal, he declined to overturn the traditional belief, commonly stated in the form “Nature abhors a vacuum”. This remained so until Evangelista Torricelli invented the barometer in 1643 and showed that an empty space appeared if the mercury tube was turned upside down. This phenomenon being known as the Torricelli vacuum and the unit of vacuum pressure, the Torr, being named after him. Even Torricelli’s teacher, the famous Galileo Galilei had previously been unable to adequately explain the sucking action of a pump.
John the Scot
John the Scot, or Johannes Scotus Eriugena (c. 815–877) held many surprisingly heretical beliefs for the time he lived in for which no action appears ever to have been taken against him. His ideas mostly stem from, or are based on his work of translating pseudo-Dionysius. His beliefs are essentially pantheist and he classifies evil, amongst many other things, into not-being. This is done on the grounds that evil is the opposite of good, a quality of God, but God can have no opposite, since God is everything in the pantheist view of the world. Similarly, the idea that God created the world out of “nothing” is to be interpreted as the “nothing” here is synonymous with God.
G. W. F. Hegel
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770–1831) is the philosopher who brought the dialectical method to its pinnacle of development. According to Hegel in Science of Logic the dialectical methods consists of three steps. First, a thesis is given, which can be any postulate in logic. Second, the antithesis of the thesis is formed and finally a synthesis incorporating both thesis and antithesis. Hegel believed that no postulate taken by itself can be completely true. Only the whole can be true and the dialectical synthesis was the means by which the whole could be examined in relation to a specific postulate. Truth consists of the whole process, separating out thesis, antithesis or synthesis as a stand-alone statement results in something that is in some way or other untrue. The concept of “nothing” arises in Hegel right at the beginning of his Logic. The whole is called by Hegel the “Absolute” and is to be viewed as something spiritual. Hegel then has:
Thesis: The Absolute is Pure Being
Antithesis: The Absolute is Nothing
Synthesis: The Absolute is Becoming
Existentialists
The most prominent figure among the existentialists is Jean-Paul Sartre whose ideas in his book Being and Nothingness (L’être et le néant) are heavily influenced by Being and Time (Sein und Zeit) of Martin Heidegger, although Heidegger later stated that he was misunderstood by Sartre. Sartre defines two kinds of “being” (être). One kind is être-en-soi, the brute existence of things such as a tree. The other kind is être-pour-soi which is consciousness. Sartre claims that this second kind of being is “nothing” since consciousness cannot be an object of consciousness and can possess no essence. Sartre, and even more so, Jaques Lacan, use this conception of nothing as the foundation of their atheist philosophy. Equating nothingness with being leads to creation from nothing and hence God is no longer needed for there to be existence.
Eastern philosophy
The understanding of ‘nothing’ varies widely between cultures, especially between Western and Eastern cultures and philosophical traditions. For instance, Śūnyatā (emptiness), unlike “nothingness”, is considered to be a state of mind in some forms of Buddhism (see Nirvana, mu, and Bodhi). Achieving ‘nothing’ as a state of mind in this tradition allows one to be totally focused on a thought or activity at a level of intensity that they would not be able to achieve if they were consciously thinking. A classic example of this is an archer attempting to erase the mind and clear the thoughts to better focus on the shot. Some authors have pointed to similarities between the Buddhist conception of nothingness and the ideas of Martin Heidegger and existentialists like Sartre, although this connection has not been explicitly made by the philosophers themselves.
In some Eastern philosophies, the concept of “nothingness” is characterized by an egoless state of being in which one fully realizes one’s own small part in the cosmos.
The Kyoto School handles the concept of nothingness as well.
Dear Cosmon,
Thank you for posting the various Philosophers who tried to deal with the concept of Nothingness. It clearly shows that without the understanding of the Unariun principle which teaches that everything is energy and that matter is an illusion … they all had difficulties.
Yes Ken – You are exactly right about these Philosophers! That is why I posted their attempt to understand the nature of the Infinite. The ancients did this without the benefit of any empirical knowledge or scientific proofs. They struggled mightily with only their ‘reasoned mind’ to conceive many such ideas or concepts. Even though they did not have the tools that the Moderator has given us in the Unariun teachings, they showed that they were coming and going to the Inner classrooms and attempted to express in this world of symbology what they were learning on the Higher Worlds. Many of them are relatively developed people and advanced thinkers within the idiom of the times they lived. I feel that you and Lesley, as do I, respect their efforts – even though, as you say, they were quite confused for lack of information available to them.
I love all your comments, as they help me to analyze and collate my understanding of the priniciples. Thank You Brother!
Greetings Ken,
Tom and I were discussing just the other day the uses of energy with its applications, and he brought up Jesus’ ability to turn water into wine. Gee whiz, I still have problems trying to roll out dough without it falling apart for my apple pies! Something tells me I have a while yet to go until I get to the wine thing:)
You saw correctly and conceived truly that “Energy Spectrum,” where as frequency increases, one of the higher properties or manifestations is increased activity. Of course we also know there is much more involved.
When we reach Mastership as Jesus had, then we will use energy at the level necessary as you had correctly observed, to be able to do what he had done. In simple terms, it reminds me of light bulbs and the different watts they come in for brightness.
Love and Light Always,
Lesley
Dear Lesley,
Just in case you get that water/wine thing going, I have a business offer for you … where you can make some real ‘dough’ (smile). L&L … Ken.
Greetings Tom,
Thank you for giving us this list of well known Philosophers and a brief history of who they were and what their philosophies entailed. I looked up the names you had presented us with so that I could refresh my memories of what had been written through history about them. Kyoto School was a new one for me, I thank you for bringing that in.
In your post under Aristotle; paragraph one, “In this scenario, space is not “nothing”, but a receptacle in which objects of matter can be placed. The void(as nothing)is different from space and is removed from consideration”. I have also read that he believed that all peoples’ concepts and their knowledge was ultimately based on perception.
The enormity of these great Philosophers minds brings respect from this one.
Love and Light Always,
Lesley
Dear Lesley – I always gravitated to the great philosophers throughout history. The ancient Greeks have a great fascination for me. I feel that you, Ken and other students visit the Hermes Centers often to learn the ‘Mental Constructs’ of the many Philosophies which adds to our upward understanding of the Infinite.
See You upstairs Dear One
I am negligent in posting and/or replying but this subject and all of your perceptions have been wonderful. It seems as if in the higher classrooms where we all study we have been given an assignment to analyze and share our understandings (each with a slightly new addition) . This web page sharing is awesome. Just reading your individual postings lifts me into a higher world. Thank you each and everyone of my brothers and sisters.
Dear Shirley,
Thanks for your comments, and I totally agree that our web page sharing is awesome! That line, “Where one or more are gathered”, comes to mind. I’ve always believed that the coupling of individual consciousnesses creates added polarizations in our fields. This, to me, explains ‘Synergy’ and allows increased resonance for the Higher Energies of Light to aid us all. Love and Light to you Shirley, and that offer for house-cleaning is still open. 😉