Philosophy Now Forum

Is the ''Human Psyche'' just a temporal ''Personification'' of Infinite Unconscious Consciousness ( A.K.A. The Timeless NOW ?

Is Consciousness the acquisition of the Unconscious Timeless NOW ?

Is the ''Human Psyche'' a recent acquisition of nature that has just showed up a few seconds ago in relation to Now?



.

ROTFL

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 8:50 am Is the ''Human Psyche'' just a temporal ''Personification'' of Infinite Unconscious Consciousness ( A.K.A. The Timeless NOW ?

Is Consciousness the acquisition of the Unconscious Timeless NOW ?

Is the ''Human Psyche'' a recent acquisition of nature that has just showed up a few seconds ago in relation to Now?

No.

No.

And No.

The End

commonsense wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 10:58 pm

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 8:50 am Is the ''Human Psyche'' just a temporal ''Personification'' of Infinite Unconscious Consciousness ( A.K.A. The Timeless NOW ?

Is Consciousness the acquisition of the Unconscious Timeless NOW ?

Is the ''Human Psyche'' a recent acquisition of nature that has just showed up a few seconds ago in relation to Now?

No.

No.

And No.

The End

When Awareness ( No Thing) knows sensation ( Knowledge ) Consciousness/mind is born ( No Thing)

What we (mind) call consciousness is memory. You become conscious of something through the help of the knowledge you have and that knowledge is locked up in the memory. Memory is the only place you exist. Welcome to the place of perfect peace where no mind lives and has it's being.

.

Dontaskme wrote:
Is Consciousness the acquisition of the Unconscious Timeless NOW

Consciousness can only be experienced in the NOW so it cannot be timeless
That is because consciousness and timelessness are mutually contradictory

NOW is not timeless because the NOW that no longer exists is in the past while the NOW that has yet to exist is in the future
But the NOW that only exists as an actual phenomena is timeless because this NOW is always in the present and nowhere else

Dontaskme wrote:
Is Consciousness the acquisition of the Unconscious Timeless NOW

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun Sep 01, 2019 12:49 pmConsciousness can only be experienced in the NOW so it cannot be timeless
That is because consciousness and timelessness are mutually contradictory

I'm not sure what you are saying here, and it's probably likely your not sure what I'm saying.

I'm thinking more of consciousness becoming aware it is conscious through possession of knowledge, which can only be an appearance within itself, aka an idea known that knows nothing. In the sense consciousness can know nothing of itself except in this conception it knows.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun Sep 01, 2019 12:49 pmNOW is not timeless because the NOW that no longer exists is in the past while the NOW that has yet to exist is in the future

But isn't this just knowledge known via thought appearing in that which never moves or ages?

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun Sep 01, 2019 12:49 pmBut the NOW that only exists as an actual phenomena is timeless because this NOW is always in the present and nowhere else

I can't see how NOW can exist as phenomena ..eh

I see NOW as the unmoved mover, the timeless place in which time is phenomena a possession known NOW that doesn't move or age.
Phenomena does move and age, it's appearance in NOW.

.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Mon Sep 02, 2019 11:22 am

Dontaskme wrote:
Is Consciousness the acquisition of the Unconscious Timeless NOW

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun Sep 01, 2019 12:49 pmConsciousness can only be experienced in the NOW so it cannot be timeless
That is because consciousness and timelessness are mutually contradictory

I'm not sure what you are saying here, and it's probably likely your not sure what I'm saying.

I'm thinking more of consciousness becoming aware it is conscious through possession of knowledge, which can only be an appearance within itself, aka an idea known that knows nothing. In the sense consciousness can know nothing of itself except in this conception it knows.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun Sep 01, 2019 12:49 pmNOW is not timeless because the NOW that no longer exists is in the past while the NOW that has yet to exist is in the future

But isn't this just knowledge known via thought appearing in that which never moves or ages?

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sun Sep 01, 2019 12:49 pmBut the NOW that only exists as an actual phenomena is timeless because this NOW is always in the present and nowhere else

I can't see how NOW can exist as phenomena ..eh

I see NOW as the unmoved mover, the timeless place in which time is phenomena a possession known NOW that doesn't move or age.
Phenomena does move and age, it's appearance in NOW.

The conscious NOW is unknown to nothing and knows nothing in the NOW of its own consciousness. When all is known by the knower the knower will know no more than NOW can know or be known.

Then reality is only the memory of reality as it first appeared in the consciousness which knows the reality of NOW. Reality appears to NOW as it would in unseen visions of the yore.

Memory cannot be known by the consciousness until the conscious NOW is awakened by the stirring of soundless serenity from which it comes. Only the memory of consciousness can call to mind the reality of yore.

When it comes to knowing the memory of NOW the knower is unknown to the consciousness before it can be known as nothing to the conscious NOW. Memory is consciousness’ belief in the reality of NOW.

The conscious NOW can see and be seen by the unseen. It can hear the soundless and touch the untouchable. The conscious NOW is the HERE that is everywhere. It can be HERE when NOW is not aware of its own consciousness.

If NOW is always it must be the un-NOW when it is not HERE. The un-NOW can be NOW when it is not HERE. HERE is a concept that is unknown by boundaries. HERE wanders aimlessly in the mind with the purpose of bringing the conscious NOW to a state of awakeningness.

HERE can be understood to be the spatial equivalent of the coordinates of the NOW’s concern. But concern for NOW cannot be HERE. It exists in the mind of HERE when it sleeps and then awakens above the cloud of NOW’s consciousness.

Dontaskme wrote:
I see NOW as the unmoved mover the timeless place in which time is phenomena a possession known NOW that doesnt move or age
Phenomena does move and age it is appearance in NOW

If phenomena moves as appearance within NOW then NOW must move too because movement cannot occur without time
NOW therefore cannot be timeless because it moves through time - if it was timeless nothing within it could move or age
NOW is composed of infinitesimal NOWS that are so small that minds cannot experience them individually only collectively

Dontaskme wrote:
I see NOW as the unmoved mover the timeless place in which time is phenomena a possession known NOW that doesnt move or age
Phenomena does move and age it is appearance in NOW

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Tue Sep 03, 2019 6:22 amIf phenomena moves as appearance within NOW then NOW must move too because movement cannot occur without time

But then 'time' cannot be known to occur either without relating time to it's opposite which is the timeless. Rendering knowledge of time an illusory story, an appearance aka a dreamscape phenomena occuring within timeless nothingness, which is just another word for NOW

Remember, the mind can only use concepts to point to itself, which in itself is not a concept and is how concepts are KNOWN.

MIND is the non-conceptual knower of all concepts. In the same context, a finger is known only in relation to the one looking at the finger creating the concept of finger in the instant it is conceived as the finger is being looked upon within a seeing that cannot be seen, for the SEER is the SEEING looking upon itself as it conceives itself to be in this conception. The seer and seen must be presently ONE in the exact same moment...knowledge of ONE is KNOWN in this conception ONE is making appearing as duality.

For something to be known to move, there has to something that doesn't move to know movement, in that any knowledge of movement can only appear within that which doesn't move, else how would any concept be known at all? which is why movement is a fictional knowledge of the mind. The mind can only relate to itself, in knowing anything, mind is only referring to itself. Object is only ever subject objectifying itself. It's one with the knowing.It is only the mind that moves, in truth, there is no mind, so nothing is moving, it only appears to. Without a mind to know, nothing is known and the known know nothing. I am the knowing that cannot be known.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Tue Sep 03, 2019 6:22 amNOW therefore cannot be timeless because it moves through time - if it was timeless nothing within it could move or age

Only the dream of separation moves through time, aka knowledge.
The dreamer which is just another word for NOW doesn't live in time, it is outside of time it is the NOW in which the whole dream of separation is arising.

The point being made is there can be no such thing as a timeless NOW, because time is of a knowledge known. Time is a concept known, and that which is known cannot know anything because knower and known are ONE...which is just another word for NOW.
The NOW cannot be known or know itself because there is only ONE NOW knowing itself the only way it can know and that is within the dream of separation, in space time duality, the only place where knowledge of itself exists...albeit illusory.

In essence...

What appears to move, never not moves.
What appears to know, never not knows.

It's a paradox only in the sense that knowledge informs, therefore, knowledge informs the illusory nature of reality. In the sense that reality is ONE, not two, or many.

Dontaskme wrote:
For something to be known to move there has to something that doesnt move to know movement in that any knowledge of movement can only appear within that which doesnt move else how would any concept be known at all ? which is why movement is a fictional knowledge of the mind

Can movement not be recognised without the conception of non movement ? Everything in reality is in an eternal state of movement and so non movement is really an illusion . The reason why non movement appears to be real is because of the very limited perspective the eye sees it from

But if it was viewed from an absolute perspective it would be seen as it really is . This would be the so called Gods Eye View that sees absolutely everything although this might only be in space rather than time . Because is it actually possible to see all of NOW from one single perspective in time ? To do this would not be possible if time was infinite . And as Existence is infinite then it logically follows that time must be infinite as well

One can also use the same analogy for knowledge . The knowledge of minds is from a very limited perspective because minds like
eyes cannot see everything which is why knowledge can never be absolute [ other than knowledge arrived at through falsification ]

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Tue Sep 03, 2019 9:22 am

Dontaskme wrote:
For something to be known to move there has to something that doesnt move to know movement in that any knowledge of movement can only appear within that which doesnt move else how would any concept be known at all ? which is why movement is a fictional knowledge of the mind

Can movement not be recognised without the conception of non movement ?

It can in the context of what is being recognised is only a concept known in reference to itself unknown, for what is unknown can only be known in reference to concept known, which is one with the knowing. In other words, this unknown knowing known. Concepts are self-arising, as this known acausal phenomena(knowledge)

Non-movement cannot be conceived of without making non-movement movement, switching contex, movement cannot be conceived of without relating it to itself, the non-mover. A non-mover is a mover, for there is no such thing as a non-mover. Reality is Acausal, a paradox only within the knowledge, which informs the illusory nature of the paradox existing at all.

One cannot know anything before it's happened. If movement happens, it's already happened before it's known. For any knowing of movement can only be known on reflection, via the memory which is knowledge, which informs the illusory nature of the knower as being empty, so knowledge of something can only be known after it's already happened by that which never happens, only appears to happen as it appears known as a mirage reflection of itself...also empty.



.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Tue Sep 03, 2019 9:22 am The knowledge of minds is from a very limited perspective because minds like
eyes cannot see everything which is why knowledge can never be absolute [ other than knowledge arrived at through falsification ]

I agree with this in the context that any relative notion/knowledge of the absolute is impossible.

On the flip side, you are the absolute knowing yourself as and through the mechanism for knowing which is the mind, aka memory.
No physical 'eye' ever saw itself.

For example: there are eyes in the mirror...people would appear very strange without them...

Are the eyes seen, the ''seeing'?

Paradoxically..no eyes seen...see...seeing sees from their perspective...neither simultaneous nor consecutive is this seeing from
all perspectives.

.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Tue Sep 03, 2019 9:22 am
But if it was viewed from an absolute perspective it would be seen as it really is . This would be the so called Gods Eye View that sees absolutely everything although this might only be in space rather than time.

Space and Time are the same thing/place..the only place knowledge is known to happen.
All happenings can only be known to happen in space-time duality, of which there is an infinite supply since space-time duality is the infinite NOW happening all at once one with the knowing that cannot be known. Demand for knowledge is within the dream of separation, on reflection via the memory. .meaning, nothing is happening, it only appears to happen because infinity allows for it...aka the observer which is just another word for infinity, which is just another word for space.

.

Dontaskme wrote:
Space and Time are the same thing / place .. the only place knowledge is known to happen
All happenings can only be known to happen in space time duality of which there is an infinite supply since space time duality is the infinite NOW happening all at once one with the knowing that cannot be known . Demand for knowledge is within the dream of separation on reflection via the memory .. meaning nothing is happening it only appears to happen because infinity allows for it ... aka the observer which is just another word for infinity which is just another word for space

There is an infinity of spacetime because Existence is infinite not because the infinite NOW happens all at once
The infinite NOW is spread all across the entirety of Existence and so it cannot all be happening simultaneously
Different points in space are also different points in time but only a mind can differentiate between any of them
So where there are no minds then there is no subjective frame of reference as the Universe itself is not conscious

Dontaskme wrote:
Space and Time are the same thing / place .. the only place knowledge is known to happen
All happenings can only be known to happen in space time duality of which there is an infinite supply since space time duality is the infinite NOW happening all at once one with the knowing that cannot be known . Demand for knowledge is within the dream of separation on reflection via the memory .. meaning nothing is happening it only appears to happen because infinity allows for it ... aka the observer which is just another word for infinity which is just another word for space

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Tue Sep 03, 2019 4:05 pmThere is an infinity of spacetime because Existence is infinite not because the infinite NOW happens all at once
The infinite NOW is spread all across the entirety of Existence and so it cannot all be happening simultaneously

Of course it can, else you would not be able to make such a claim that there is an infinity of spacetime. Of course to announce the idea of infinity at all must imply it exists and that it's happening all at once. If it's not happening all at once then where else is it happening?

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Tue Sep 03, 2019 4:05 pmDifferent points in space are also different points in time but only a mind can differentiate between any of them

A mind that can differentiate between two points is separation. Time and space are required to make separation known. Separation can only be known in relation to what must be undivided, and by my logic that which is whole can never become divided...rendering separate points in space time duality an illusion...albeit the illusion is real to the mind that divides itself into parts.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Tue Sep 03, 2019 4:05 pmSo where there are no minds then there is no subjective frame of reference as the Universe itself is not conscious

Neither is the mind conscious. Consciousness has no idea it is conscious, the idea is a fictional arising conceptual known within it's not-knowing.

.