Consider this.
Nothing and
something are made up
notions that are a
complication of the particular way our
brains happen to work.
Buddhists will tell you that a state of
emptiness, of nothingness, is
englightenment. There is
logic behind this. Because
thought is a reductive process, and truthfully, the difference between something and nothing can only be apprehended by
thought.
Or put differently, nothing is good or bad (or nothing or something)
but thinking makes it so.
Or, the difference between any two things is in the eye of the beholder. To two different eyes, the universe has an entirely different shape - and nothingness, or its absence, is really a conceptual shortcut. Nothing in nature is empty, even by our own measurement. Nothing is a placeholder. A gear in our cognitive machine.
So the Buddhist's point is that by approaching the state where you are empty, where you do not think, you discover the similarity and diversity of all things. In other words, you apprehend the all the simultaneous possibilities of all the possible interpretations of the moment - which is an incoherent, chaotic jumble from which nothing useful can be deduced, but then... it's thought's job to be useful, and Buddha's nature to be enlightened.