The Nature of the Mind

I think its hilarious that we are so sure of something we can't ever really be sure of. Fact always begs another question and Truth never gives a full answer.

rugadd wrote: I think its hilarious that we are so sure of something we can't ever really be sure of. Fact always begs another question and Truth never gives a full answer.

and why is that?

Nature of . . .

There is a school of “spiritual psychologists”, out of Columbia University, in the 70’s (research psychologists) who merged spirituality and psychotherapy; thus taking their work beyond anything that preceded it.

They say that awareness (consciousness) actually does nothing of itself; although all the messages from unconscious and all the messages from the super-conscious are experienced in awareness (consciousness). The former was not new, but the latter and the joining of the two is relatively new to the field of psychology. And perhaps, clear and known, to some degree, for centuries, within the most evolved realms of spiritual paths and religions.

Unconscious, in this light, is reservoir of memory and all associations (the computer/brain).

Super-conscious, in this light, is the transformative that Joe Campbell talks about in the myths.

Like these spiritual psychologists, Joe Campbell’s view of life itself seems to be “embrace it all”. . .

it doesn’t have be this or that. . . .

this now is a true story
once upon a time
i had a profound experience of peace
immediately following a revelatory thought:
“what if . . . everyone is right?”


just musing now about the Nature of . . .
there is the Force
and then there is force
and of course
the analysis of forces
the seen and the unseen
desire versus experience

Knowledge and Wisdom
the purpose to be still
TotJO Tenets
Focus mind and will

Reread the last sentence for your answer.

By the way, the brain is always the mind, but the mind is not necessarily always the brain.

It takes a little time to create a gap between the witness and the mind. Once
the gap is there, you are in for a great surprise, that you are not the mind, that
you are the witness, A watcher.

And this process of watching is the very alchemy of real religion. Because as
you become more and more deeply rooted in witnessing, thoughts start
disappearing. You are, but the mind is utterly empty.

That’s the moment of enlightenment. That is the moment that you become for
the first time an unconditioned, sane, really free human being.”
― Osho

Im not seeing how the mind isnt the brain in that quote.

What is witnessing, regardless of your ability to quiet other thoughts, is still through the brain, which is connected to your central nervous system, and transmitting information from all your senses including your eyes...

You cannot witness without a brain.

Show me some proof, not a philosophical quote, that it can.

Keep in mind also, that many philosophies were not created at the same time as current breakthroughs of sciences.

As such, there thought processes, and philosophies might be a good deal different had they been. Without it, they were left to "thinkin a whole lot" to explain why were here, what our nature is, etc.

In many cases, we now have many philosophies and religions trying to "square peg, round hole" there system into what science has presented.

Which is based of of "thinkin real hard" as the first step.

Then you have to prove your thought.

Or, in light of being wrong, disprove it.

Fact is, your state of mind, and experiences had therein, are reliant upon the brain, and the biological/chemical cocktail that pumps within your veins.

Alter any of this, and your mind is altered,how you percieve is altered, this can be consistently proven.

Khaos wrote:

Yes, they would all have an effect, but would they let you know it's nature?Purposeful ignorance is'nt the same thing as being comfortable not knowing something, that may or may not be possible to be known. The original post suggested that the nature of the mind could not be described, not that the brain does not have a relationship with it.

Can you say without a doubt that it wouldnt help you know its nature?

No, I cannot say that, that's why I would not and did not.

Certainly, if your ok with not knowing something, or that it may not be possble to be known, however thats a poor line of thinking on any road to discovery.

I respectfully disagree, it keeps all possibilities open, and all possibilities open is better than looking for answers within a set of parameters that do not hold all possibilities, that is limiting before you start to look for answers.

Also, you(and many others) were saying the brain is not the mind, and the fact that they are inextricably linked( which there relationship, as you put it, is), would indicate that finding its nature would be more than likely through the brain. Thats simple logic applied.

I never said the brain was not the mind, I asked the questions on the the premise that just because they are linked, does it let us know all the answers regarding the mind, in relation to the original and following posts, I actually never made a statement about what the brain or mind was, just asked questions, but I doubt many neurologists would suggest that the brain and mind where the same.

I also find it ignorant to say there are things beyond science, such thinking imprisoned and killed scientists for proving exactly the opposite.

I never said their was anything beyond science and I don't think anybody was killed because they proved there was nothing beyond science, that would have been truly remarkable, they were killed because they did not follow an established way of thinking for the age, much like me.

Simply because you cant fathom it, or choose not to because your comfortable with it, doesnt mean the future will not present it through science. Especially since they arent comfortable with not knowing.

This may or may not be correct, but because I am comfortable with the fact that all knowledge is not at my disposal as I am now, it does not mean I would not like to have it, or that I would not strive to understand what I do not yet know, I think you are making massive assumptions about a person you have never met before, you might think differently if you did, or not.

I think people simply prefer the vague, ambiguous, or ineffable here, and it seems comfort is a big part of that.

Kind of like knowing how a magician does there tricks can ruin it for some people.

I can't speak for other people, but for me personally, I would rather nothing was ambiguous to me, but because I know and accept that many things are, does not mean that I prefer it, that's a strange assumption. Saying that everything must have and will have an answer is also very comforting for a lot of people.

In any case, I hadnt strayed off topic at all. I was simply pointing out the fact that people will say the brain is not the mind, but then talk about a relationship to it, a relationship, that allows you to even be who you are and think the thoughts you do.

Yes?

Hmm.... Perhaps its this sites negative reaction to definition..

I don't think it's anything to do with that, it's not a definition, it's a theory based on the fact that it may be understood enough to be defined, as such it is not yet definable, not from the real world of science, and if it is, why is it a secret? By saying that the mind is definable because it is one and the same as the brain, means that it is limited to definition, if it has a limit then yes it in theory can be fully understood, but that begs the question, is it limited to the point where it can not be defined by its self?

Khaos wrote: Im not seeing how the mind isnt the brain in that quote.

You cannot witness without a brain.

You already said, the mind cannot exist without the brain, but the brain can exist without the mind....

However,

Show me some proof, not a philosophical quote, that it can.

How about animals?

Can I use them?

Animals have brains, and yet seem to have no trouble with mind...

Humans cannot seem to shut their brains up for very long without thinkings something... :lol:

Keep in mind (meaning think, dont just observe) also, that many philosophies were not created at the same time as current breakthroughs of sciences.

As such, there thought processes, and philosophies might be a good deal different had they been. Without it, they were left to "thinkin (using the brain, and not allowing it to be quiet) a whole lot" to explain why were here, what our nature is, etc.

In many cases, we now have many philosophies and religions trying to "square peg, round hole" there system into what science has presented.

Which is based of of "thinkin real hard" as the first step.

Then you have to prove your thought.

Or, in light of being wrong, disprove it.

Fact is, your state of mind, and experiences had therein, are reliant upon the brain, and the biological/chemical cocktail that pumps within your veins.

Alter any of this, and your mind is altered,how you percieve is altered, this can be consistently proven.

Lets look at nature again...

A monkey, doesnt sit there and have useless thoughts, as a rule, KoKo might have, as she was kept in close proximity to humans, and our whims, but as a rule, monkeys use their mind to solve a problem, and them turn it off to simply 'be'...

We do the same, but, now, instead of 'being' people veg out in front of the TV for their 'tune out' phase...

Once you start using the mind, and dont quit, then you get tangled up in it...

Negativity is totally unnatural. It is a psychic pollutant, and there is a deep link between the poisoning and destruction of nature and the vast negativity that has accumulated in the collective human psyche. No other life form on the planet knows negativity, only humans,
just as no other life form violates and poisons the Earth that sustains it. Have you ever seen
an unhappy flower or a stressed oak tree? Have you come across a depressed dolphin, a frog
that has a problem with self-esteem, a cat that cannot relax, or a bird that carries hatred and
resentment? The only animals that may occasionally experience something akin to negativity
or show signs of neurotic behavior are those that live in dose contact with humans and so link
into the human mind and its insanity.

Watch any plant or animal and let it teach you acceptance of what is, surrender to the
Now. Let it teach you Being. Let it teach you integrity - which means to be one, to be
yourself, to be real. Let it teach you how to live and how to die, and how not to make living
and dying into a problem.

Eckhart Tolle, The Power of Now