the tangibleness of nothing.

sometimes i honestly feel as though i’ve nothing to say, nothing to write. and having mentioned as much to my buddy alex this morning, during an exchange of texts, he suggested i then write about nothing, the tangibleness of nothing. that made me smile of course. this is a guy who reads voraciously and has done silent retreats, he fixes engines and builds furniture. and yet he gives me full credit for knowing something important about ‘nothing’.

i was quick, however, to point out that every tom, dick and hari-anand seem especially eager these days to communicate their great knowledge. “yeah, that’s true,” alex retorted. “however, i’m pretty sure their nothing looks a lot different than your nothing. and even if nothing is nothing, their description of it will have quite a different feel.” that did it for me. i committed to giving it a try, a little later. because right then it was time for me to, well, do nothing for a while.

after doing nothing for a while i shuffled on outside to shoot a few basketballs at my driveway hoop. a young lady who lives down the street walked by and said she wished she had a hoop on her driveway. she was bored. so of course i told her she’d be welcome to use mine from time to time. i even suggested that i could bring out one of my old balls for her to play with exclusively. the lady looked quite doubtful so i assured her that there was still a lot of life left in my old balls and anyway i could pump them up. 

of course it took me longer than it should’ve to realize my mistake. judging by her expression, and as our social-distancing seemed to increase exponentially, i perceived that maybe she didn’t even know how to play basketball. she maybe had just been making idle conversation. anyway, she beetled off down the street and i went inside to write a few lines about nothing in particular.

this being easter sunday, i wanted to consider the deeper significance of the resurrection, specifically as it might pertain to the idea of nothing or nothingness. but i knew that could be tricky and i’m always afraid of offending people. the fear lasted about a minute before i concluded that it was much more important to be candid. it’s my blog afterall, and my interpretations may indeed, as alex mentioned, have a different feel. you see, as much as the crucifixion to my mind is alot about nothing, so to is the resurrection alot about its tangible results.

when one decides to stop, to effectively do nothing, to meditate, one is essentially and immediately sacrificing ones personal identity. one is essentially letting go of who and what one has thought oneself to be. and inevitably a time comes when one rises up again but with a very new and additional sense, that one just may also be the very life itself that permeates and animates everyone, everything. then a daily practice of being nothing actually creates a sense of being everything.

the question begs asking: what does all of this have to do with the price of fish today? or would one be able to simply produce a bunch miraculously? in other words, what is the tangibleness of nothing? 

the only really miraculous power is the power to love unconditionally. and, while the world’s great philosophies and religions preach about oneness, the practice of meditation creates the visceral experience of it. then if someone, let’s just imagine, falls ill with a virus, one hates it and intrinsically wants to help. because it’s just a bit more as though one is helping ones own self.

“in the stillness of your presence, you can feel your own formless and timeless reality as the life that animates your physical form. you can then feel the same life deep within every other human and every other creature. you look beyond the veil of form and separation. this is the realization of oneness. this is love.” ekhart tolle.