What happens when reality is gone?

>>3167813
*being that not even him would be part of it or either that he would be disolved on it as well?

>>3167813
>experience a pure "nothingness"
an experience is something whichc implies an experiencer which is also something, therefore you have two things which is not nothingness

>>3167813
>Would such "nothingness" or void disprove the existence of a sentient god
in the abrahamic faiths alone, not to mention others, one finds many mystics who speak of god as a "divine nothingness"

>>3167813
you'll find out when you die

>>3167813
>Would it be possible to experience a pure "nothingness"
No. That'd be like saying you could see your blind spot. Your blind spot doesn't look dark or empty or black, it doesn't look like anything at all because it simply doesn't exist as part of your field of vision. Same thing with death. People often imagine death as everything going black like the series finale of the Sopranos, but in reality that wouldn't happen because you won't be around even a second after you die to see anything, black or otherwise. You simply won't be there to experience anything because your existence is bounded by your birth and death and any experiences you have can only take place within that span of time between those two events. Outside of that span of time (before birth or after death), there is no you available for any sort of experiencing.

the act of perceiving is something

File: image4.jpg (50KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 480x480px

>>3167813
You mean a non-experience or a anti-thought? Did some intense psychedelics during a guided meditation, makeshift tms device; really made me think. Also I don't fear death anymore, I welcome the end of this nightmare. Is it possible? The power of the human imagination makes me believe that it may be possible, but could such an encounter with primal immense be verbalized? Not by my metal.

>>3167861
>>3167881
>>3167928
>>3167930
Perhaps I used the wrong word or should've put "experience" with commas to suggest that it wouldn't be a common experience. Maybe as this >>3168101 anon says, "non-experience" or "anti-thought" is a bit accurate. Still, no word may probably be able to explain such a phenomena accurately

>>3167868
Interesting.

>>3168116
*a bit more accurate

>>3167813
If there's no reality there's nothing for you to exist within and thus you also can't experience anything.

When reality is gone there's no words to talk about what's there and what it's like

>>3167813
>Would it be possible to experience a pure "nothingness"
No. If you can experience it, it is something, not nothing.

>where what we perceive as reality is completely gone?
Whatever is then perceived would by definition be reality.

>Or as long as we are alive we will always be conditioned by our senses?
What?