Nothing & No Thing

[Guest guest]

> NonDualPhil , Pedsie2@a... wrote:

> > Let me remind you, Lewis, that many times you have referred

> > to your words, actions, your capabilities, and incapabilities

> > as coming from an " unknown darkness. " Wasn't that a pointing

> outside

> > words?

>

> ===I've asked him the same thing. For me - the more I

> was sure that there's nothing outside of X, the less I'd

> try to account for X in terms of a Y.

>

> In fact, if I were really sure that there was nothing

> outside of X, then X itself would start to destabilize

> mighty fast and stop making sense....

>

> --Greg

 

 

Hi Greg,

 

As you know well, I do not speak about nothing outside of X. The phrase

is " There is no thing beyond words. " These are completey different

sentences with completely different meanings. There is no outside or

inside in the second phrase. Where do you see an outside or an inside

in this Greg? It is hard for me to hear you say what you did above as

that was talked about so much last week. There will be words on

Thursday.

 

Second, perhaps you are confusing my experience of darkness with the

statement " there is no thing beyond words. " There is little

relationship between the two. The first is a analytic statement coming

from experience and analysis of it, a conclusion of a kind. The talk of

" darkness " is about my experience in living and it is not a statment

about what is or not beyond words or some generic " unknown darkness. "

Pete dreamed that up and put those words in my mouth. You are coming

into this sideways, Greg. And I must say it is surprising. You never

said such things to me in our discussions and it seemed that there was

clear understanding about it as it went. Perhaps not. We will see.

 

To make it clear to you. There is no generic " unknown darkness " like a

divine darkness or nirguna brahman or other conceptual object for me as

it may be for others. I can understand these objects as they are

conceptualized and variously discussed and believed in but that is all

they are to me. The " darkness " or recently " pellucid darkness " I refer

to is a metaphor for my inability to directly see how language,

behavior, emotions emerge out of my appearance as an experience. It

just happens. This just happening is all " dark " to me, and I call it my

" darkness " as I cannot know how those things occur, how they emerge, it

is is impenetrable to the intellect and understanding and yet knowable

in what happens. It is a description of an inseparable experience where

there is darkness and then light, or no understanding and then

understanding.

 

s you know well, I do not speak about nothing outside of X. The

phrase is " There is no thing beyond words. " These are completey

different sentences with completely different meanings. There is no

outside or inside in the second phrase. Where do you see an outside or

an inside in this Greg? It is hard for me to hear you say what you did

above as that was talked about so much last week. There will be words

on

Thursday.

 

===I was using 'X' as a placeholder.

X's can differ. Some people fill it like this:

 

" There's nothing outside of concepts. "

" There's nothing outside of words. "

" There's nothing outside of awareness. "

" There's nothing outside of THIS. "

" There's nothing outside of presence. "

 

Etc. E.g., how can " concepts " make

sense if everthing other than concepts

doesn't make sense? It's the problem

with all reductionisms that stop short

and leave the tip of the tail.

 

Lewis: Yes. That is so. There is no disagreement

with this in any way. But all of what you wrote above was

never said or meant by me.

 

We can examine how different in meaning these two

statements are.

 

* There is nothing outside of words

 

* There is no thing beyond words.

 

These are not the same in any way. First, there

is no outside or inside in the second sentence.

More importantly, " no thing " and " nothing " are

not equivalent.

 

The connotations are used in this way:

 

Nothing: the lack or absence of anything

 

No thing: no separate and distinct individual quality, fact, idea, or

usually entity, the concrete entity as distinguished from its

appearances.

 

With these connotations, There is nothingness or complete absence

of anything and in first statement.

 

In the the second this is not so.

 

In the second statement, there are simply indistinct forms and

apperances and as such they are not " things. " As such, they are empty

and therefore beyond notions of existence and nonexistence, being and

non being and inside and outside, location and non-location, time and

no time all the other tetralemmic permutations that apply to " things "

that have separate, distinct, individual self-existing or imputed

content like the thing " nothing. " Now all one has to do is ask and

answer: How do forms and appearances become " things " having such

separate, distinct.....

 

This is Nagarjuna's reference to no inherently self-existing things,

emptiness.

Forms, appearances do not qualify as separate independent, inherently

self-existing " things. " They are empty. Emptiness is form. Form is

emptiness. They are not things. Now if the subtlety of it wishes to be

missed it can. Can't force it. One can see it or one cannot. Seeing a

appearance as no thing.

 

 

Now in your case with me, I'm not sure

what you think about words themselves.

There are certainly ways of saying

" Nothing outside of X " without landing

on the 100-ft pole of X itself! Maybe

we can explore that on Thursday!

 

Lewis: Yes. And a bit of it is above.

 

The " pellucid darkness " thing is more

Pete's interest than mine. I know

the sense wonder and mystery of being

unable to (but wanting to) account for

appearance. I wrestled that one question

for 3 years straight, virtually every

minute I wasn't doing something

else like working or riding my bike

or paying bills. It vanished when

its assumptions crumbled and

dissipated....

 

Lewis: As you know, I cannot account for them

as it is a futile exercise. Instead,

I explore what the appearances appear to

be, what they can be, the stories that we

make of them and enjoy the exploration and

sharing of findings. I have no why or how

questions about appearances origins and the

the like as these are unanswerable in my

rock bottom experience. So, I explore and

learn what we do with the appearances

as it comes around.