What is consciousness?

[John G]

time = information recorded by consciousness = consciousness recording information...
recording also basically stores the information in the consciousness which performs the recording.

The universe state is perhaps your consciousness state but you would have to be 7th density to perceive it all and 6th density to perceive a complete worldline through it. Choosing your new universe/consciousness state would be time and would store your new information in your new universe/consciousness state.

makes perfect sense that in 5D time would not flow, not only as perceived by a consciousness there, but actually there would be no time in 5D, as practically no new information would be recorded by the consciousness and stored into their beings there. The information recorded during various incarnations by living experiences would then be assessed and contemplated in 5D, where the essences of consciousness beings reside, and eventually plans and blueprints for new recordings would me made to access the information needed for let's say bridging the gaps in awareness as one of the endless possibilities.

You probably still would store your new information in your new universe/consciousness state in 5th density since reactions to contemplating is still new information to store plus you can still interact with others in 5th density. No flow of time is perhaps more of a jumping from worldline to worldline 6th density-like so it's not a flow of time for a single worldline perhaps but could still be the recording new information in a new universe/consciousness state kind of time.

 

[John G]

That is there seems to be no time as a separate dimension in 3+1 dimensional spacetime as modern science and physics promulgates. The C's even suggested something in that direction during the session of February 10th 2018.

Well the Cs replacing time with consciousness could be for the overall time as a choosing of a universe/consciousness state but time for us stuck in 3rd density could still be a 3+1 spacetime metric thing (but perhaps with a conformal structure group rather than just a Lorentz/Poincare symmetry).

Second, that our perceptions that time flows faster when we're doing something fun and exciting, and flows slower when activities are tedious, is not necessarily only matter of perception, but might actually be a real thing. That in itself is kind of mind-blowing.

Well 3rd/4th density conformal symmetry could be thought of as shortcuts and certainly 5th/6th density jumping from worldline to worldline would be too but I kind of prefer more shortcut semantics than faster time flow semantics.

The part about the 7D was more like a cherry on top of everything what's written before that. It has flowed naturally to the screen as a nice concluding remarks. Focusing on that part only, seems to be like ignoring the elephant that has just landed in the room prior to that.

A complete universe/consciousness state could come right after a big bang, in other worlds the state would have a 6th density to be entangled with a 3rd density channeler as well as having the other densities. From a 3rd density flow of time point of view there would also be many more universe/consciousness states to go through to go from 3rd to 6th density. A lot of what I'm saying is a brane point of view (the Cs liked branes but not string theory) and a point of view thinking about time for massless particles (5th and 6th density; the Cs talked about massless particles for pure energy past life memories even though they worried about the effect of that for the love and light crowd).

 

[furryfrog]

There are multiple references throughout the sessions about what is consciousness, but unfortunately so far they haven't given birth to something close to a proper definition in mathematical terms, that can be worked with within known frameworks like algebra for example.

For the purpose of having sort of a dataset to work with in that direction, to kind of get a broader view of phase space we are dealing with here, I am asking for a bit of your time and energy to be invested in answering a few questions below.

If you will, you can put your answers in the spoiler boxes, sort of not to influence others in their answers.
Thank you.


- What do you see when you look at yourself, at your consciousness?
-- What kind of a being do you see? Does it have boundaries, and if so how do you perceive them?
-- Do you perceive that your consciousness has sort of a "seat", and if so where would that be?

- How do you perceive consciousness of others around you and that you interact with?

Spoiler

In math terms I see the number 3.
3 lower centers, body, mind and emotion, and 3 higher centers, body, mind and emotion.
So in math terms you get 3, 3 plus 3 equals 6, or 3 plus 3 equals 33.
One can also go with 3 times 2 equals 33, like Mahayana Buddhists with the three masteries and the two existences.

The main seat of my consciousness is in my mind, or in 4th way terminology I am man #3.

Most people around me defiantly have forgotten about their body consciousness, and just run on auto pilot.

 

[bozadi]

Next, the C's used the word "equals" which indicates mathematical precision or the exact equality in mathematical terms, in a sense providing a definition or one of possible definitions for "time", which can be then rewritten as:
time = information recorded by consciousness = consciousness recording information.

I had completely forgotten the C's statement "Information recorded equals time" when I recently shared a similar idea in another thread:

I think "time" primarily refers to the "time" involved in "learning". This could explain its "variability and selectivity" So, in the sense that "learning exists", we can also say, apparently, that "time exists". But considering the fact that whatever is being learned is "already known" in a higher level, "time doesn't exist", because all is already known.

I might have very possibly remembered it subconsciously, though :)

There are many possibilities, including that existence may not be truly infinite.

For some reason, my first impression is that existence is infinity. Somehow, they probably refer to the same thing. But this also depends on what we mean by "existence". Here, in this context, I take it as being/awareness in its purity. Let's remember Ra's repetitive use of the words "infinite" and "infinity" in reference to God as the supreme being and all. It seems that God/7D is not only "all that there is", but also all that "can be", i.e., infinite "potentiality". Although I mentioned in my above quoted idea that "all is already known", I also perceive that if "everything" was known, then this could pause a problem about "free will". Ra's following explanation can be pertinent:

Questioner: In that case my higher self would, shall we say, have a very large advantage in knowing precisely what was needed since it would know what… as far as I am concerned, what was going to happen. Is this correct?

Ra: I am Ra. This is incorrect, in that this would be an abrogation of free will. The higher self aspect is aware of the lessons learned through the sixth density. The progress rate is fairly well understood. The choices which must be made to achieve the higher self as it is are in the provenance of the mind/body/spirit complex itself.

Thus the higher self is like the map in which the destination is known; the roads are very well known, these roads being designed by intelligent infinity working through intelligent energy. However, the higher self aspect can program only for the lessons and certain predisposing limitations if it wishes. The remainder is completely the free choice of each entity. There is the perfect balance between the known and the unknown.

Trying to reach a definition of consciousness/awareness is a great idea, although this can be very complicated in some respects. My initial effort was to reach a definition of "being", but upon developing a familiarity with nondualism/advaita, I noticed that being/existence and knowing/awareness are explained to be the same. The C's also seem to be confirm this in their statement "Soul is consciousness". I'm still trying to understand.

In that sense, it makes perfect sense that once 7D has been reached, the consciousness performs the ultimate service to others act by dispersing and spreading itself as innumerous new 1D elementary consciousness units to create time anew and again for others, for All

I think the C's said "God Force" (big bang energies) "permeates all densities", not only 1D. One doesn't return to 1D after 7D, but becomes actually all, including 1D.

The way the C's described it is that we all go to 7D together once everyone reaches 6D.

As I previously discussed in some other threads, what the C's mean by that statement might be that, when one becomes 7D or goes big bang, we also experience that even if we are in 3D STS, because "all is one".

Q: (L) Well, when you have a pulse, you have a wave, and if you have a wave, that implies time.

A: Therein lies the crux of your 3rd density illusion. Why assume that any given aspect of the pulse is not occurring simultaneously with any other. And if any are, all are. Until you once and for all break free from the illusion of time, you will not advance.

This might be closely related to the "fractals" issue.

I want to suggest a book entitled "The Elephant and the Blind" that I recently came across during my web searches for the concepts of "pure being", "pure awareness", etc. It's written by a German guy named Thomas Metzinger. There are some interesting web videos of him trying to explain things that can be of interest for the people here. The book has a freely accessible PDF version (Each chapter is also offered as a separate PDF for convenience):

https://direct.mit.edu/books/oa-monograph/5725/The-Elephant-and-the-BlindThe-Experience-of-Pure

https://direct.mit.edu/books/oa-monograph-pdf/2328586/book_9780262377287.pdf

I haven't read the book yet, but only skimmed through. The guy seems to try to define what pure awareness is. And I think one of the highlights that makes the book interesting is numerous supportive quotes made from among the statements or explanations offered by many "meditators".

 

[bozadi]

If 5D really is contemplation zone as suggested, then it makes perfect sense that in 5D time would not flow, not only as perceived by a consciousness there, but actually there would be no time in 5D, as practically no new information would be recorded by the consciousness and stored into their beings there.

Ra calls 5D as the "Density of Light". This implies a profound "illumination". And I think this illumination is closely related to the issue of non-existence of "time" as we know it. To explain it in terms of time's relation to "learning"; although our knowledge as 3D beings is limited, what we are learning about is actually our very self. We're travelling in, on, through, and around "us". We're destined to arrive in us. We are being/learning about us. No actual duality, no actual separate points of start and end, thus "no actual time". Maybe one can also say "yes and no", depending on whether you are looking more from within illusion or more from the absolute perspective.

I think 5D is where one can see this bigger picture relatively clearly to the extent one doesn't resist seeing it. In the subsequent densities, "seeing" and "being" gradually become one more and more, I suppose.

 

[msasa79]

There could possibly be and perhaps probably are at least two times or two temporal dimensions, as the C's suggested in the same session when they said that there are four spatial dimensions (don't have the exact date reference at hands at this moment), and as Ark briefly mentioned in his latest blog entry.

One dimension might be related to what has been described here, to consciousness recording information, that is learning through experience in all possible ways. That time could be perhaps represented as a spiral going, cycles within the cycles, associated with the development of Rays of Creation, main and lateral octaves.

The other time dimension might be something in relation to observation, something that has been emerging from the space and algebra itself, associated with the Wave perhaps, cycling eternally now through the whole of existence. Kind of reflective of the Law of Three, where observation of observation, that is the iterative application of observation to an observation, respects the free will and does not interfere with the natural progression of the observed. Maybe something like the Universe observing itself observing.

FWIW.

 

[msasa79]

Trying to reach a definition of consciousness/awareness is a great idea, although this can be very complicated in some respects.

Agree.
Working in that directions in other thread, while opened this one in an attempt to get some more data points to work with.

It seems there's a slight, but maybe important distinction between consciousness and awareness. Consciousness does not necessarily need to be aware, or can be just slightly aware of let's say only its own being, so for the definition of consciousness maybe we could use as a working hypothesis something like 'knowledge of being'. It would just include information about being and about knowing about its being.

Awareness on the other hand, or being aware, presuposes consciousness for being in the position to be aware.
At least it looks that way to me.

If so, then we would have consciousness as a foundation or substratum for everything, which by learning, observing and recording information, arranging that information by truth, grows and becomes more aware, not only of its own existence, but also of others, of all the possible ways existence can express itself within the cosmic information field or the DCM.

Well, that's a general broad idea so far, waiting for the elaboration of its details where the devil often hides, as Ark would wisely say.

 

[bozadi]

Agree.
Working in that directions in other thread, while opened this one in an attempt to get some more data points to work with.

It seems there's a slight, but maybe important distinction between consciousness and awareness. Consciousness does not necessarily need to be aware, or can be just slightly aware of let's say only its own being, so for the definition of consciousness maybe we could use as a working hypothesis something like 'knowledge of being'. It would just include information about being and about knowing about its being.

Awareness on the other hand, or being aware, presuposes consciousness for being in the position to be aware.
At least it looks that way to me.

If so, then we would have consciousness as a foundation or substratum for everything, which by learning, observing and recording information, arranging that information by truth, grows and becomes more aware, not only of its own existence, but also of others, of all the possible ways existence can express itself within the cosmic information field or the DCM.

Well, that's a general broad idea so far, waiting for the elaboration of its details where the devil often hides, as Ark would wisely say.

Yes, Maharaj also often differentiates awareness and consciousness (whatever the original concepts are in his local language, Marathi). I think what he means by awareness is the "purest form of consciousness". Accordingly, pure awareness has no "object", it's not aware of something specific, while consciousness has always an object (conscious of something). In this sense, I think, awareness refers to the absolute, while consciousness refers to the illusion. But since I find no such specific differentiation in the Ra-Cassiopaean cosmology, I don't care much about it.

We're destined to arrive in us.

I want to add a clarification. Although we are 3D, we always have some part of us in 5D, we have a higher self in 6D, and, as for 7D, we "dwell there eternally" according to the C's.

So, being 3D doesn't preclude us from experiencing any other density in some way, to some extent. In fact, our identity as 3D is probably not as true as our identity as 7D, because us as 3D is not absolute (we'll graduate to 4D, we regularly visit 5D, etc.), while us as 7D is absolute, it never changes.

 

[Gruchaa]

Hi! Interesting topic.
For some time, I like the way how it was explained/presented in Castaneda's books:
Assemblage point - isn't it similar to C's teachings about "projector" idea? That we are focused currently on our 3D lifetime due to our assemblage point position (consciousness focus)? Moving to 4D is drastically changing assemblage point position and its flexibility (expanding consciousness?) ?
I am also wondering if things described by Don Juan/Nagual to Castaneda about "first" and "second" awareness are close explanation what our consciousness looks at 4D. It's written that our "first awareness" is the one which creates the world we live in. And if you are to concentrate enough on "second awareness" which is unlimited consciousness (closer to One?) you can get rid of any limitations and create the world you want. For me it sounds and resonate very close to what Cs are telling about 4D (state when physicality is our home, not prison).

Consciousness appear as an ability to increase awareness (define capacity of our awareness) of inner and external world we experience. With gaining more knowledge, you increase your awareness, which expands your consciousness.

 

[John G]

There could possibly be and perhaps probably are at least two times or two temporal dimensions, as the C's suggested in the same session when they said that there are four spatial dimensions (don't have the exact date reference at hands at this moment), and as Ark briefly mentioned in his latest blog entry.

One dimension might be related to what has been described here, to consciousness recording information, that is learning through experience in all possible ways. That time could be perhaps represented as a spiral going, cycles within the cycles, associated with the development of Rays of Creation, main and lateral octaves.

The other time dimension might be something in relation to observation, something that has been emerging from the space and algebra itself, associated with the Wave perhaps, cycling eternally now through the whole of existence. Kind of reflective of the Law of Three, where observation of observation, that is the iterative application of observation to an observation, respects the free will and does not interfere with the natural progression of the observed. Maybe something like the Universe observing itself observing.

FWIW.

An early session mentioned 4 space-like plusses for a spacetime signature and 2 time-like minuses. This would be for the conformal structure group and this does give circular spacetime dimensions. The more recent sessions deal with a degenerate metric where the time signature becomes a zero instead of a minus. The Cs related it to prism aka frequency and I think this is some morphing of generalized proper time and the Feynman propagator related to Ark's most recent blog post.