Not for nothing but....

[Terrance]

When a person "knows" what a word "means", he/she knows more than the
word's definition --he/she also knows how the word functions in
different contexts. For example, the definition of the noun
"nothingness" might be something like "The condition or quality of being
nothing; nonexistence (AHD). However, the noun "nothingness" can have
other meanings, like "Empty space; a void" or "Lack of consequence;
insignificance" or "Something inconsequential or insignificant" (AHD).
In the phrase being discussed the noun "nothingness" is spoken by a
member of the clergy, the words nearest it are,  God, Salvation,
Redemption, and Death. The context provides clues to the meaning. 

The irony here is that wrangling over the meaning of the noun
"nothingness" on a single page in a huge and complex novel in an absurd
manner has prevented a discussion of  "nothingness", Existentialism,
Atheism, so on ... as a driving force, theme,  or idea in the novel or
in Pynchon's novels. 

You know, this discussion would not probably never get bogged down like
this if the contexts was DeLillo or Gaddis. What is it about Pynchon or
the Pynchon Critical Industry that gets people into such absurd dead end
End Zones? 

PS I'm not avoiding your quires S~Z, Mind, Consciousness, Wholeness,
etc., just thinking  about the best way to include Jung and not get my
ass in trouble.