Who Knows the Knower?

The Self is Awareness only. 

-------------------©---------------------

7

Does Time Exist?

What Is Time?

-----------©-----------

Answering the question that has been asked here in the title, it is presumed that we know something about Time. We do have at least  something, a hint that could take us to reach the goal, in the understanding, what is Time.

It is very important to see, how do we know and form the mental image of Time, because Time is not a physical object or fact that we could grasp through senses (as the sensory perception), and at the same time, Time is also not any mental one, such as thought, memory, feelings or emotions. Still we can conveniently catagorize Time in terms of past and future. Though we can imagine and think of, or make a visual image of past and future, and with the help of memory, recall too incidences that we associate with such a notion of our past and our expected future. This is also interesting to see that all such a past and future have always and inevitably a reference to 'me'. A person who has a past and (thinks) has a future. Saying 'a past' and 'a future' again not exactly correct. Past and Future, - if not adjectives, are uncountable /  abstract nouns. (But the English Grammar points out to them as adjective). In fact, the article 'a' itself serves as an adjective, and so again the past and the future may be treated as noun. Whatever, it is itself doubtful if the thing that we call the past or the future, does really exist or not. 

What about the so-called 'present'?

Do we really know this 'present' as any other object, as a fact that is grasped and is known through the senses?

Though we are very sure without suspicion or doubt that this 'present' is an ever-abiding truth, we are simply just unable to look at it as an object. The insight and the instinct, too point out this naturally and spontaneously to us. So, there is no controversy what-so-ever, what exactly this present is to us. Still, when, as soon as, we associate this 'present' with a nearest past or a nearest future, we take it to be an 'event' in Time. Then and there, we get fumbled.

We should not and need not try to define this 'present', which is reality ever-abiding only, - and never a passing moment like the bygone past or the imagined future.

This 'present' is verily the consciousness of the being, and being is verily this conscious 'present'.

This 'being' is truly the consciousness, and this 'consciousness' is truly the 'being' only. 

As soon as this being or the consciousness is turned into being someone and being a self, who is conscious of being, everything goes topsy-turvy. Then we tend to categorize and define Time in terms of past and future and then we tend to believe that time exists and has existence as such. This hypothetical and imagined Time, even though well-defined, is but will-o'-the-wisp only.

This is how Time is such a nightmare for the physicist and the philosopher.

What to speak of the layman?

We will never know if Time really exists or not!!

--

न त्वेवाहं जातु नासं न त्वं नेमे जनाधिपाः।।

न चैव न भविष्यामः सर्वे वयमतः परम्।।१२।।

(श्रीमद्भगवद्गीता, अध्याय २)

***

The Only Question

कालो कलयतामहम्।। 

(श्रीमद्भगवद्गीता 10/30),

कालो धाताहं विश्वतोमुखः।।

(श्रीमद्भगवद्गीता 10/33)

कालोऽस्मि लोकक्षयकृत्प्रवृद्धो लोकान्समाहर्तुमिह प्रवृत्तः।।

(श्रीमद्भगवद्गीता 11/32)

--

Does Time Really exist?

----------------©------------------

If Time really exists, how and in what way, what phenomenon this thing the Time is, or if it is not, may be truly such a big, greatest riddle, conundrum or illusion, the strongest faith, and the most amazing intrigue, bizzar miracle or the subject of investigation it may be, one hardly thinks about this 

So far I have not come across a single such a person, such a man who-so-ever, who could have asked this question. Everyone takes it as if for granted, that time is something that really exists, and in the same way, no one ever bothers if time is some-thing that really exists or not, why can't it could be dealt with accordingly as we deal so many other things also, that we think do exist. One could hardly doubt if those other things really exist or not. We are so utterly convinced about that these various things do exist, though always keep changing the form and perhaps the name as well. These many things are  tangible, could be touched, seen, thought of, imagined and their existence as such is a comprehensible and physically verifiable truth, a matter that could be grasped and understood also like so many other physical objects. 

But no scientist, no scholar, mathematician, physicist ever come forward and ask about the truth of, this thing is, that we call time.

How-so-ever cleverly or intelligently we try to talk about time, no one ever doubts if this thing what we are referring to as time, really exists or not! That never occurs to us. Isn't it a wonder, why we never ask this question, why we never doubt if the phenomenon that is time, has really an independent existence of its own -like those innumerable other physical objects? Is time only a hypothesis, a concept, an imagination, an inference, or a reality, a intellectually and mathematically verifiable principle?

The way we use time as a day to day term is also just fantastic. For all practical purposes, we can sure measure it and compare two or more such time-spans, and we tend to think that we know something about the character and the nature of time. Quite interesting and funny! This is time-frame without a content. 

How could we trust the different paradoxical aspects of time, that we come across all the time? How could we arrange these various notions about time that are so contradictory with one another?  The same length of time,  say a minute or an hour, sometimes seems to pass very slowly, while fast on other times.

Physical Time by the watch may be treated as the standard criteria for the measurement of time, but that too is relative, depending on and with reference to the solar time. And we have yet another criteria that is according to the study of the molecules and atoms. That seems to be far more authentic, and yet time keeps eluding us.

Had time been a real thing, so far we would have sure arrived at something final about its character, nature, and structure.

But just because such a time as such, doesn't exist at all, we couldn't find out so far.

This proves, that our very first assumption that time exists was somehow incorrect. There was an error in assuming and taking it granted that time really exists and that was the first and the primary hypothesis, the veracity of which we never even cared nor tried to examine.

This doesn't mean that time has no relevance or significance any. Time is the only bridge between the consciousness and the material existence and as such, time is of the utmost importance.

A characteristic point is :

Is the time of the dynamic or the static kind? 

Sometimes though we take it as if of moving kind, while on the other times tend to think that time moves not.

Could we perhaps think and define inertia post time? 

Have we ever noticed how this approach is a paradoxical one?

Maybe, our understanding of time itself is basically erroneous. Or, perhaps we could see and realize how to correct our approach and two ways of thinking about time could be reconciled.

Conclusion :

We can see, as change defines time, and time in the same way defines change, both these two inferences are interdependent and two aspects of the truth of time.

The same principle has been described as :

नासत्यौ - न असत्यौ - अश्विनीकुमारौ।

In Veda.

The two, the change and the time, none of the two is असत्य / untrue.

By the way the word equinox may be truly a cognate of अश्विनौ। 

According to

shrimadbhagavdgita ;

Though inexplicable and incomprehensible for the human mind, Time could be thought of as if having inferential existence as such, and could be dealt with accordingly.

***

JOY, - is Intelligence.

AI and the Robotic Intelligence

-----------------------©---------------------

A Case study :

In a recent news, a robot attacked a chess-player. The robot was playing with 4 other players at a time, while one player was too fast in his moves. The AI-commanded robot could not cope with the timing and faltered in decision-making, because was guided by the AI input in it. 

This is a good example to demonstrate that AI is but a skill like the intellect and operates according to acquired knowledge only. Has no insight and wisdom that a living person has been endowed with.

Intellect is skill and how-so-ever perfect and great, works within the limits and periphery of the known.

In contrast, Joy is Intelligence, never stale, never in the known. Joy is never the past, nor in the imagined future. It is now, here, in the instant, spontaneous.

Unfortunately our whole education-system is a victim of intellectual way of learning, that trains us in a few skills but hardly poses any challenge before us to find out how to evoke the insight within us.

Insight is talent. We humans have so far not  learnt how it is discoverd, has to be bought up at the fore. Insight couldn't be acquired by intellectual exercise. It may be though present latent within, and could be ignored or neglected for the time, but ultimately one becomes aware of the same and find how it is not an intellectual pursuit but the dawn of wisdom.

Wisdom could never be taught nor instilled, it is to be ignited within, illuminated within in a way, that is quite a difficult task. But the Intelligence makes it happen in a second, in the instant.

We can see, say that LaMDA is an exercise in intellectual training in skill, and has nothing to do with spontaneous Intelligence and the in-sight, the inspiration born of wisdom.

***

How Long?

One can....!

--------©----------

What is consciousness?

A question with no answer. 

---------------------©-------------------

Consciousness is never "What".

Consciousness is the one Who-so-ever asks this question.

Consciousness is never an Objective Reality.

Consciousness is essentially the one, That manifests itself as I, You, He, She, Who.

Consciousness is sentience.

Before it takes the form  : 'I', You, He, She, or Who, it is the ever present being or self only. 

This self is this consciousness, and the first and fore-most expression of consciousness of the self. This consciousness of the self is in contrast and comparison to the 'other', that is 'non-self'.

This self or self-consciousness is essentially and inevitably the very consciousness or the conscious being associated with, and at the same time, confined within a body, or this physical organism, wrong-fully taken as I. 

As it is bound by the limitations of the body, which is made of the same material as the world is made of, yet because of having the sense-organs, it takes itself as the body only and the rest as 'other', which is called the world, as something different and not the self.

So, consciousness could never be pointed out or addressed as and in terms of 'What'?

'What' is a pronoun used for the insentient, inanimate objects, while 'I', 'You', 'He', 'She' is used for sentient beings possessed with and possessed by consciousness.

Insentient, inanimate objects and things are not alive like the sentient, conscious beings.

So, How could one ask :

"What is consciousness"?

Consciousness implies awareness of, about something. Basically it is of the Self only, that at once is split into self-consciousness and the awareness of the 'other', the not-self, and that is called the world.

As has been pointed out earlier, this physical body and the rest of the world is made of the one and the same stuff, which is the material cause of the both.

This material-cause or the material-aspect is ever so the known and never the One 'Who' 'knows'. The two aspects of the the knowing  or consciousness are therefore the known, - and the one 'Who' knows.

This knowing is the all-inclusive pervading and all-pervasive aspect of consciousness.

Rationally and logically also, one can never address, point out to this in any of the terms like 'What', 'I', 'You', 'He', 'She', even 'that', or 'it'. 

But the sensory perception or the sentience creates the illusion of a multiplicity of many a conscious beings, different and other than one-another.

That is How the Four Cardinal Truths are expressed in these following four forms :

प्रज्ञानं ब्रह्म, -- Consciousness is Brahman. 

अहमात्मा ब्रह्म, -- This Self is Verily Brahman.

सोऽहम्, --- He* is I (Self), I is He*.

अहं ब्रह्मास्मि. -- I AM THAT*.

WHERE He / I is the Supreme Reality, THAT is Brahman, indirectly pointed out as  'तत्', --the third person singular pronoun.

The Omniscient, and thereby

The Omnipotent, and

The Omnipresent One, and

The Unique Principle.

***

प्रसव-प्रतिप्रसव

Creation, Existence and Dissolution.

---------------------------©-------------------------

Terminology :

--

प्राण (cosmic energy),

रयि (cosmic material),

चेतना (sentience inherent),

शरीर (Body), मन (mind) चित्त (consciousness),

अस्तित्व (Existence),

भान (Intelligence / Consciousness),

चैतन्य (Awareness),

Give rise to :

The apparent relative Time (काल).

The idea of Cause (कारण), and Effect (कार्य), is the notion, that rises up in the individual.

बुद्धि (Intellect), -- the sentient being, who has such a अन्तःकरण (psyche).

--

नासतो विद्यते भावो नाभावो विद्यते सतः।। 

उभयोरपि दृष्टोऽन्तस्त्वनयो तत्त्वदर्शिभिः।।१६।।

अविनाशी तु तद्विद्धि येन सर्वमिदं ततम्।।

विनाशमव्ययस्यास्य न कश्चित्कर्तुमर्हति।।१७।।

(श्रीमद्भगवद्गीता अध्याय २)

जन्माद्यस्य यतः।।

(ब्रह्मसूत्र १/१/२)

--

असन्नेव स भवति।

असद्ब्रह्मेति वेद चेत्।

अस्ति ब्रह्मेति चेद्वेद।

सन्तमेनं ततो विदुरिति। 

तस्यैष एव शारीर आत्मा यः पूर्वस्य।

अथातोऽनुप्रश्नाः।

उता विद्वानमुं लोकं प्रेत्य कश्चन गच्छती३।

आहो विद्वानमुं लोकं प्रेत्य कश्चित्समश्नुता३ उ। 

सोऽकामयत्।

बहु स्यां प्रजायेयेति।

स तपोऽतप्यत स तपस्तप्त्वा इद्ँसर्वमसृजत यदिदं किं च।

तत्सृष्ट्वा तदेवानुप्राविशत्।

तदनुप्रविश्य सच्च त्यच्चाभवत्।

(त्यत् च अभवत् -- त्यत् - असौ, ditto the same, = सः,  the one described earlier) 

निरुक्तं चानिरुक्तं च।

निलयनं चानिलयनं च।

विज्ञानं चाविज्ञानं च।

सत्यं चानृतं च सत्यमभवत्।

यदिदं किं च।

तत्सत्यमित्याचक्षते।

तदप्येष श्लोको भवति। 

(तैत्तिरीय उपनिषद् - ब्रह्मान्दवल्ली, षष्ठमनुवाक)

अथ सप्तम अनुवाक :

असद्वा इदमग्र आसीत्।

ततो वै सदजायत।

तदात्मान्ँ स्वयमकुरुत। 

तस्मात्तत्सुकृतमुच्यत* इति। 

यद्वै तत्सुकृतं* रसो वै सः।

(* कठोपनिषद् - सुकृत १-३-१)

रस्ँ ह्येवायं लब्ध्वाऽऽनन्दी भवति। 

को ह्येवान्यात्कः प्राण्याद् यदेष आकाश आनन्दो न स्यात्।

एष एव ह्यानन्दयति। 

यदा ह्येवैष एतस्मिन्नदृश्येऽनात्म्येऽनिरुक्तेऽनिलमनमभयं प्रतिष्ठां विन्दते।

अथ सो अभयं गतो भवति।

यदा ह्येवैष एतस्मिन्नुदरं अन्तरं कुरुते।

अथ तस्य भयं भवति।

तत्त्वेव भयं विदुषो मन्वानस्य।

तदप्येष श्लोको भवति।

सप्तम अनुवाक समाप्त।। 

--

सदेव सौम्य इदमग्र आसीत्।।

ततो असत् अजायत।। 

अथ वा असत् एव....

यदासीत अग्रे  .... 

--

इस प्रकार अस्तित्व जो है, नित्य, शाश्वत, सनातन और अविनाशी (दृष्टा) है, जिसका विनाश नहीं हो सकता।

"यह है, -अस्ति यत्, - अस्तित्व," -- ऐसा कोई कहता है।

यह कहनेवाला कोई चेतन तत्व है, न कि जड। 

कहनेवाला चेतन ही दृष्टा है और वह जिस अस्तित्व को देखता है जिसका ईक्षण करता है वह जड दृश्य है।

चेतन के द्वारा ईक्षण होने की घटना ही तप है। 

ईक्षण रूपी अग्नि में ही उस चेतन के ही प्रसंग से, जड सतत रूपान्तरित होता हुआ, - जो है, उसे ही प्रतीत होता है।

यह हुआ प्रसव (Creation / Evolution) ।

इस प्रक्रिया के इस क्रम में जन्म एक बिन्दु है जहाँ अविनाशी अवयक्त से व्यक्त रूप ग्रहण करता है। तब क्रमशः पहले जड और चेतन में, और इसके बाद अन्तःकरण और बाह्यकरण के रूप में और विकसित होता है।

यह सब कब प्रारंभ हुआ? -- यह प्रश्न बुद्धि में ही उठता है, और प्रमादवश (because of inattention) बुद्धि (intellect) में ही इस प्रकार काल (Time) की प्रतीति और काल / समय का आभासी जन्म होता है । अविनाशी, नित्य, सनातन शाश्वत इस अस्तित्व पर चेतन में बुद्धि के व्यक्त होने के परिणाम से ही, उस बुद्धि से ही काल का उद्भव हुआ।

काल का (उद्भव / उत्पन्न होने से पहले) 'कब' का प्रश्न ही कहाँ और कैसे उठ सकता है?

अक्षरात्संजायते कालः कालाद् व्यापकः उच्यते....।। 

यह हुआ काल और व्यापक आकाश (space) जो मूलतः वही अविनाशी है जो कि दृष्टा है और जो दृष्टा की तरह से अविकारी आधारभूत (Immutable prime principle) है। 

इति प्रसवः।। 

--

अथ प्रतिप्रसवः

पातञ्जल योग-सूत्र (अध्याय २) : साधनपाद

तपःस्वाध्यायेश्वरप्रणिधानानि क्रियायोगः।।१।।

समाधि भावनार्थः क्लेशतनूकरणार्थश्च।।२।।

अविद्यास्मितारागद्वेषाभिनिवेशाः क्लेशाः।।३।।

अविद्या -- क्षेत्रमुत्तरेषां प्रसुप्ततनुविच्छिन्नोदाराणाम्।।४।।

अनित्याशुचिदुःखानात्मसु नित्यशुचिसुखात्मख्यातिरविद्या।।५।।

अस्मिता --

दृग्दर्शनशक्त्योरेकात्मतैवास्मिता।।६।।

राग: --

सुखानुशयी रागः।।७।।

द्वेषः --

दुःखानुशयी द्वेषः।।८।।

अभिनिवेशः --

स्व-रसवाही विदुषोऽपि तथारूढोऽभिनिवेशः।।९।।

ते प्रतिप्रसवहेयाः सूक्ष्माः।।१०।।

(ते क्लेशाः प्रतिप्रसवहेयाः सूक्ष्माः)

ध्यानहेयास्तद्वृत्तयः।।११।।

(ध्यानहेयाः तत् वृत्तयः)

--

इति प्रतिप्रसवः।। 

***