Question was more about if C was superior to A which had the concept of Time as irrelevant, would that mean C is superior to the Concept of Time
you asked my question to i was wondering how 1A BDE 2 works.
Being superior to someone who has time has irrelevant does not mean being superior to time . But if that character was superior to time and character C was superior to them, it would mean character C is also superior to time.
The concept of time being irrelevant can be interpreted in various ways, making it too vague. In some places, individuals can travel through time freely, which could be seen as making time irrelevant. Other places might have unusual causality or randomized durations, therefor making it seem like time is irrelevant. You could even say that planets without day or night cycles make "The Concept of Time" irrelevant.
Lack of a concept does not mean superiority over a concept, otherwise, NEP would be tierable. And transcending a place that doesn't have a concept of time, would at most mean that transcendent place doesn't have one either.
Wouldnt the place transcending the place without the concept of time mean it's transcendent over it? It was also stated Place C was outside space-time before
You're transcending a place, that has no concept of time. How can you transcend time, if time isn't even apart of what you're transcending?
Wouldnt the concept of time still exist in the lower places?
You didn't mention any other places in this scenario though.
I mentioned Space B, though i didnt give anything context to B
Well if Space B is a Universe/Space-Time Continuum, then transcending it, with the proper context would be Low 1-C. Space A treating the concept of time as irrelevant is still too vague to gauge, and like I said being outside of time and space is BDE Type 1.
Wouldnt the concept of time still exist in B, and C being transendent to everything below it mean its above?
Transcendence over a single space-time does not imply transcendence over all extensions of space and time. Additionally, unless explicitly stated that the Concept of Time, not time, but the actual concept, lives/exists within Place B, and destroying Place B results in the concept of time being destroyed, then it cannot be assumed that transcending Place B equates to transcending the concept of time itself.
Doesnt the Concept of Time still exist somewhere in cosmology below Place C that isnt in B then?
Being outside of a concept's range of influence does not make it below you. Unless the verse specifies, there's no way to know where the concept of time 'exists'.
But doesnt the verse imply the Concept of Time existing, by having a plane without it
I didn't say it didn't exist, I said there's no way to know where exactly.
If Place C had statements of binding everything together, would that mean C contains the Concept of Time
Depends on the context. Binding everything together is pretty vague.
In this case it would mean everything is connected to it
Could it qualify for a possibly/likely?
Is there any reason to assume this wouldn't be referring to being ageless..?
This scan was mostly to prove the Concept of Time existing
There's also it being outside of Space-Time, and beings on that plane being imperceivable to ones on a lower plane, also was accepted for superiority in this thread
it was more to say the Concept of Time resided inside the plane
There's the plane being above another plane that was responsible for everything including time, and them bridging the gulf between time and space.
