Consciousness=Existence

[Someone here]

I'm probably off-base here so I guess I'm asking more so to poke holes in my thoughts.. 

1) non-being is impossible a la Parmenides' "is not". Thus existence must exist.

2) Existence must exist in such a way that what is outside of it is not non-existence. The line between existence and non-existence can not be analogous to the line that separates an inside from an outside.

3) Consciousness is this dividing line that details existence. Consciousness itself is the very shape of reality, the form of existence. Without Consciousness of existence there would be non-being, and similarly without existence there would be no Consciousness, and so non-being. The two arise equally and are dependent. A dependence of the objective on the subjective, and vice versa.

*there is still room that our Consciousness is necessarily necessary. It seems this form of Consciousness is still allowed to be  the result of evolutionary game theory with the above points. If there were only infrared-sensing consciousnesses then that would be existence, but existence could still exist.



I'm not quite sure what connects point 2 and point 3.. I'm probably wrong somewhere 

Edited June 15, 2021 by Someone here

[Tim R]

54 minutes ago, Someone here said:

2) Existence must exist in such a way that what is outside of it is not non-existence. The line between existence and non-existence can not be analogous to the line that separates an inside from an outside.

@Someone here What makes you think that? What if existence is actually absolute and has no opposite? 

You can't go outside existence. Even the most "nothing" state you could imagine (for example the way things were before you were born), even that is existence. Existence must be all encompassing. You can't leave existence, because wherever you would go - you're still inside existence. 

[tatsumaru]

45 minutes ago, Tim R said:

@Someone here What makes you think that? What if existence is actually absolute and has no opposite? 

You can't go outside existence. Even the most "nothing" state you could imagine (for example the way things were before you were born), even that is existence. Existence must be all encompassing. You can't leave existence, because wherever you would go - you're still inside existence. 

If the dream doesn't exist then it's not existence, just an illusion. It exists in a similar way that a mirage does. You perceive it but only because you are delusional.

Buddhists have a nice exercise in realizing what existence is not, called Dependent Origination: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pratītyasamutpāda

Basically the idea is that, if something changes then it doesn't exist and is simply an illusion. If you want to understand why that logic is valid check out the full exercise.
One of the greatest book on the topic of what exists and what doesn't is called "Heart Attack Sutra" by Karl Brunholzl.

Edited June 15, 2021 by tatsumaru

[Someone here]

50 minutes ago, Tim R said:

@Someone here What makes you think that? What if existence is actually absolute and has no opposite? 

You can't go outside existence. Even the most "nothing" state you could imagine (for example the way things were before you were born), even that is existence. Existence must be all encompassing. You can't leave existence, because wherever you would go - you're still inside existence. 

Maybe you misunderstood my point. 

I'm actually saying exactly that.  There is nothing outside of existence. Non existence does not exist. Therefore it's not even outside of existence. There isn't an outside to existence. 

[Tim R]

@Someone here Then what exactly is your question? How to connect point 2 and 3? 

[Someone here]

@Tim R

I don't have a question today 

 I'm making an argument that existence is absolute and nothing is outside it. And that consciousness =existence.   However I wasn't sure if my points were valid or correct. 

 

[allislove]

Yes, Consciousness=Existence! But who is rising this argument? Investigate that direction  

[Eternal Unity]

5 minutes ago, Someone here said:

  However I wasn't sure if my points were valid or correct. 

It's valid on my part. Thanks for sharing your understandings.

[vladorion]

2 hours ago, tatsumaru said:

If the dream doesn't exist then it's not existence, just an illusion. It exists in a similar way that a mirage does. You perceive it but only because you are delusional.

Buddhists have a nice exercise in realizing what existence is not, called Dependent Origination: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pratītyasamutpāda

Basically the idea is that, if something changes then it doesn't exist and is simply an illusion. If you want to understand why that logic is valid check out the full exercise.
One of the greatest book on the topic of what exists and what doesn't is called "Heart Attack Sutra" by Karl Brunholzl.

Buddhism doesn't say that things don't exist.

Saying things don't exist is very different from saying things don't have their own independent existence.

[Nahm]

@Someone here

The word existence gets used both ways. Sometimes as ‘reality’ or ‘appearance’, and sometimes as Being. 

[Mason Riggle]

"Cogito, ergo sum"

"I think, therefor I am"

"Consciousness = Existence"

The following sentence makes no sense -'There exists a Lion that can not be experienced in any way.' 

 If something 'can not be experienced' it is NO DIFFERENT than 'not existing'.   If the difference  between 'the experience of something' and 'it's existence' can't be 'experienced', the difference doesn't 'exist'. 

[Tim R]

3 hours ago, Someone here said:

I don't have a question today 

Didn't think I'd ever live to see this day...wow??

3 hours ago, Someone here said:

I'm making an argument that existence is absolute and nothing is outside it. And that consciousness =existence.   However I wasn't sure if my points were valid or correct. 

Yup. You could say that being and non-being constitute existence. Or that existence itself is neither being nor non-being, but the underlying unity of them. Existence is truly non-dual. 

[Someone here]

@Nahm it's not so much the label as it is with the meaning.

But As you say, at the end of the day, all Labels and concepts must be dropped. But we can only point to the indescribable. 

[Nahm]

?

[Someone here]

@Tim R

There you go ?