So as i understand according to Aristotle's theory of abstraction every abstract concept (i.e universal) is instantiated (or abstracted) from it particulars in the outside world if that so how can we explain the existence of the concept "Nothingness" (or the concept of "impossible") in our minds if it has no particulars (Nothingness does not exist)
Systems are defined by boundaries (cf. systems theory), which essentially define what is and what is not the system. The idea of negation is inherent to our thinking.
Systems are, by definition, groups of interrelated parts. In multiple circumstances, a system loses all its parts (behavior known as dissipation). Emptyness is what happens to such system, and nothingness is its equivalent, from a generic point of view of existence.
For example, if you have marbles in your pocket, the system is "marbles", which is a group of parts (each marble) sharing an ideal relationship (e.g. they are all in the same place, or, they are all marbles of the same size, or they are all not coins). If your pocket gets empty, the system has dissipated, become empty.
So, the pure concept of "apple" raises the idea of "non-apple" in our mind. If I ask you to put all apples in a bag, you will not put a bottle inside, this is quite obvious, but it shouldn't be so. "Possibility" raises naturally the notion of "impossibility" in our mind. For nothingness, the idea of "everything" would produce a group of what is not everything. This is inevitable, it's just how our brain processes ideas. So, what is not everything comes to be nothingness, a natural idea raising from the idea of grouping all things.
For me Nothingness is simply the ontological reality/truth/God or whatever name which is similar. It's simply unknowable through our human mind perceptions, experiences, reasoning, no matter how advanced the techniques you employ, there's still an invincible gap between human understandings and the ultimate reality, assuming its existence. So you can also even claim it does not exist as we normally experienced in this world, not even like unseen X-ray.
The critical insight of Nothingness is like a blank paper metaphor, from it you can draw any shape or structure as long as it's possible according to certain rules. So many religions and philosophy schools historically conveniently used this vivid name to call the ultimate relevant reality, but the drawback is it easily caused so many confusions for layperson to believe there's no meaning or worthwhile to do anything. But on the other hand, no name will be perfect to describe the "undescribable" ontology...