In the literature, you hear descriptions by sages of the emptiness of existence or the fullness of being. These seem contradictory but actually describe the same thing, typically at different stages of depth and clarity. I’ve touched on this before. The topic came up in another forum and I thought it useful to share that comment here.
On the point about universe as void or emptiness – this is a specific level of experience.
When awareness curves back on itself and becomes aware of itself, it recognizes itself. In that recognition is also a distinction and the dynamic of subject, object, and process of experiences arises.
In that distinction subtle space arises. This is the foundation of the “elements” known in traditions the world over.
When our awareness settles down into origins, we become conscious of this space and have the experience of a void or emptiness. Some may fear this experience in initial tastes due to it’s lack of locality, a loss of me sense. But as it gets familiar, qualities become more apparent. We may describe a boundless infinity. And we may recognize ourselves to be that.
With further clarity, the experience settles into the awareness that contains that space, known as Atman in the east. Then we recognize we are the awareness that contains or observes the space.
Still deeper and we recognize the dynamics of awareness mentioned above and the profound potentiality for any intention to be manifest. Then it is not experienced as emptiness but rather fullness. Awareness is ever lively or flowing.
Of course, how this process unfolds subjectively varies widely by individual, but that’s the jist of it and why it’s experienced certain ways. And that leads to how it’s described.
No votes so far! Be the first to rate this post.