The Divine Comedy – To Transcend Everything Into Nothing


Leonardo Da Vinci posited a number of principles of thinking in regards to the ways in which direct experience and the mind play one to the other. In this sense, he wanted to catalogue observations and thinking as a formulation of function and self-consistency.

When taking into account some of the manner of the self-consistencies in mind, think of some of the most classic examples of human thought, a married bachelor, in thought, is not something within the realm of thinking, except as a formulation of words carried into a sentence.

Ergo, formulations of words can lead to meaninglessness and can derive from the meaningless because of the impossibility of the thought and the impossibility of true meaning conveyed by the thought.

The possible and the impossible in regards to thinking creates limits. A square circle, not the squaring of a circle or vice versa, as in all relevant properties of the square and all relevant properties of the circle equating to one another, these provide a basis for comprehension of one to the other, as in differentiating and not equating to one another.

A square circle, a married bachelor, and so on, amount to the impossible in mind if taking the categories in a serious manner. As one delves into the writing of Da Vinci, he posits something of a circle with a point.

In this point in the circle, one can project an infinity of lines from the point; while, also, one can project an infinity of lines beyond this too, and from any other point within the circle. In this manner, it becomes a hall of lines, or circle rather, infinite in parts and relations if desired.

These formulations represent infinities in mind. While, since the thoughts contain no space, or are spaceless, they are that which do not and cannot exist because of their ontological status in the mind rather than in the world.

Without applying it in art, but in theology, we can expand some of the thinking in which the fact of things in the mind containing no space, indivisibly, means the non-dimensionality, in reality, of things in the mind.

For Da Vinci, the things of the mind were, by definition, dimensionless. He posits dimensionlessness for imaginary objects, or those of the mind, where he considers direct experience of the world as a primary.

Things in the world as dimensional rather than dimensionless. These dimensions represent the real, as given by the senses. These are contained in space, so do not lack existence and have divisibility.

While things of the mind, given their lack of reality, they become dimensionless because they contain no space, as in every other point relates directly to every other point instantaneously and without regard for apparent separation in mind.

By dint of their lack of dimensionality, they amount to nothing. This “nothing” becomes something of a hallmark of things in the mind. In turn, the things of the mind, as nothing, represent nothing more than the culmination of a singular thought without true dimensionality as lacking spatiality.

In this lack of spatiality, these become as nothing. Things of the mind, in the light of their containing no real space, so having spacelessness, amount to nothing. He says exactly that with several experiments of mind to demonstrate this.

So, to be a-spatial is not to be transcending space, it is to be non-existent. In other sections, he goes on to describe the infinite as to have no form, as in to be infinite means to have no form. So, all finities mean form; all infinities mean no form.

A traditional set of properties for a god, as in Divine Attributes, are eternality, goodness, grace, holiness, immanence, immutability, justice, love, mercy, omnipotence, omnipresence, omniscience, righteousness, self-existence, sovereignty, and transcendence.

The psychological qualities, as divine attributes, so divine psychological attributes, are goodness, grace, holiness, justice, love, mercy, and righteousness. These require a being extant, first; otherwise, no divine psychology present there.

In turn, we come to the properties of the divine, as in eternality, immanence, immutability, omnipotence, omnipresence, omniscience, self-existence, sovereignty, and transcendence. Each of these properties posits an infinity, as in absolute and limitless.

The idea of the eternal means an a-temporality or an infinite temporality, or functionality to both. Immanence implies an immanent existence in all relevant respects and places. Immutability means an unchanging nature and form.

Omnipotence means the ability to do anything. An omnipresence means a presence in all places. Omniscience means knowing everything. A self-existence means contingent upon nothing else.

Sovereignty means ownership or rulership over all. Transcendence means to transcend all limits, as in limitless. That which is beyond definition in a true sense becomes God.

While, with these properties provided by theology, we can describe the ideas and forms of God in terms of the properties in His existence as well as the psychological qualities of God, so as to differentiate the ideas of the Divine Attributes themselves; those which are assumed as true and then taken as the first fact carried forward.

A failure of the properties rather than the divine psychological qualities ruins the foundations for psychology. Even if taking the Divine Attributes as true, and accepting the assertions of the qualities as first fact, we can examine them for some consistency, while utilizing some of the principles of thought of Da Vinci as a starting point.

To Da Vinci, to be infinite is to have no form, so to have no real content; to be finite is to have form and content, that which comes from or generates within the mind as truly having no dimensionality or space because of its non-reality.

Imaginary ideas rather than real objects; real objects of the world of direct sensory experience and imaginary ideas of the world of the mind. In this way, Da Vinci speaks of the dimensionless nature of the mind’s imaginary objects and the dimensionality of the objects of the world of direct sensory experience. The world places limits as the mind contains nothing via its lack of space.

Those properties rather than psychological attributes of the divine as seen in the Divine Attributes of goodness, grace, holiness, justice, love, mercy, and righteousness in contrast to the more primary Divine Attributes, as properties, of eternality, immanence, immutability, omnipotence, omnipresence, omniscience, self-existence, sovereignty, and transcendence.

To know requires some material structure, as seen with all that we know about beings that can know; to exist means to exist in a time, as time unites with space, so with space; to be immanent means a sense of immanence in both space and time, so coming to a sense of the spatiotemporal requirements of immanence tied to a spatiotemporal volume or worldline implicated in a “material structure,” so omniscience, immanence, come as facets of omnipresence: Immanence means an omnipresence; omniscience means an omnipresence, or a presence.

Thus, we come to eternality, immutability, omnipotence, self-existence, sovereignty, and transcendence. While these properties come from thought, of things in the mind, the base existence of the world exhibit properties given to the senses, while the mind’s considerations mean a lack of dimensionality to them, or a spacelessness to their attribution.

Or, rather, in a manner of speaking, we can consider the reduction of space to dimensionlessness as nothingness, similarly with a proposed transcendence of spatial limits. In this transcendence, we can note the manner of infinity creating no form, as in infinite.

To propose an attribute, as in a Divine Attribute, as an infinite, it becomes formless, due to its infinity as a property; while, with this infinity of property, the formlessness means a lack in the property or the Divine Attribute itself, which means a double falsity in title in meaning.

As in, a Divine Attribute, in such a manner, becomes neither “Divine” nor an “Attribute” because an attribute would imply a self-limit so as to have a form with an attribute, a property, or a quality in the first place.

Therefore, the Divine Attributes, or the more primary attributes of God, with an infinity, in this aforementioned sense, would mean an impossibility of attribution, so a lack of attribute. This applies to eternality and transcendence.

In that, these mean something akin to a-temporality via endlessness, as reflections of the same attribute. To become the infinite in time, as in endlessness, or to transcend, is to become without form, while claiming a property. In turn, these become as those in the mind, nothing.

Leaving immutability, self-existence, and sovereignty, and omnipresence, the nature of Nature is both necessity and change. Without transcendence or eternality, the only presence is that which is in space-time, and space-time changes, and no sovereign would exist in the will of acts or the choices made and acted out by operators in the universe, as freedom of the will is given to human beings in the universe as a property for a creative act willed in the universe, thusly negating the total sovereignty as in a Divine Sovereignty.

Furthermore, when taking arguments for aseity or a self-existence of God, as in an aseitous being leading to all that which is seitous or being itself, existence in itself and time in existence, the contingency needs lead to an origin point of existence, to make the argument for that which embodies true and complete aseity, while, as with eternality and transcendence, something spaceless is not only not a thing; it’s nothing, as per explanation before.

Which is to say, the universe self-exists, not as a rabbit out of a hat but out of the Necessity of existence itself, if one takes these arguments seriously, and as with no total sovereignty (on the premises of the theology with freedom of the will), and mutability inherent in Nature by necessity, and as omnipresence implies a form of absolute presence and transcendent presence, the infinity creates no form while proposing a solution through infinitude, so leading to no true presence as a property, and spatiotemporal-lessness means a true nothing, so non-existent.

No eternality, immanence, immutability, omnipotence, omnipresence, omniscience, self-existence, sovereignty, and transcendence means no divine psychological qualities to embody them, so as to mean no primary properties or Divine Attributes in eternality, immanence, immutability, omnipotence, omnipresence, omniscience, self-existence, sovereignty, and transcendence derives no goodness, grace, holiness, justice, love, mercy, and righteousness.

Indeed, simply considerations of infinity having no form meaning no property, so only finities having form and so having properties, and the spaceless meaning nothing as in non-dimensionality, all Divine Attributes becomes a buggers brigade for millennia.

No space to have properties, so no materiality to embody them; thus, Divine Attributes as a divine comedy of errors (Q.E.D.).

Photo by Mark König on Unsplash

Leave a Reply