Re: The heart has a mind of its own

[Guest guest]

<< Researchers are finding that the poets might have been right: The human

heart

is the physical home of love and, perhaps, the repository of the soul itself.

>>

Hmmm, and the Ancient Egyptians, who believed the heart was the repository of

learning and wisdom. The brain was not preserved in a canopic jar. It was a

millenia later that people began to understand what the brain was and did.

best,

phoebe

[Guest guest]

Ghazaleh wrote:

>Researchers are finding that the poets might have been right: The human

heart

>is the physical home of love and, perhaps, the repository of the soul

itself.

The exclusive focus on the brain in the work mentioned in the Newsweek

article was in my opinion it's weakest link. You can't disconnect the brain

from everything else, especially other neural networks in the body.

Scientists tend to be tunnel-visioned, but it is probably a necessary

component for getting as focused, as they must to do research in the first

place. It is the job of more catholic imaginers among us to piece all the

stuff together to make more holistic sense out of it all.

Greg,

Taking the stuff of the article another step is a tall order. I guess the

article brought me in tune with an extremely interesting thread of research

(to some). I will accept the responsibility of watching neurotheological

research closely and report any new developments that I find and help others

put it together in some kind of meaningful way.

I will tell you that it heightened my awareness of an apparent analogy in

nature to our imagining of God. I was conscious of killing my first mammal

in the road on Saturday. I have long prided myself in being able to avoid

squirrels and other animals in the road.

But this time I could not brake in time. A squirrel will dash into the road

before he sees a car coming. When he (or she, of course) is startled by it,

he will use his natural instinct and quickly reverse direction. If a big cat

had been chasing the squirrel, this avoidance mechanism might have allowed

it to escape the cat, which could not have reversed direction as readily.

But the car is not a cat, and it is not chasing the squirrel. It is just

going where it is going.

When humans view things that they do not understand in an egocentric way,

like the squirrel views the car, they can likewise get run over by it. Time

spent treating the universe like a squirrel treats a car, may be aliveness

time lost through ignorance.

When I realized in my little est training that the universe had little to do

with me, I just went home to my wife and I can tell you that I started to

live at that moment. What I am saying is that I had a rebirth of sorts. It's

one of the Jungian archetypes. It isn't really any more important than the

archetype that causes a person to pray their life away. I am suggesting only

that in time, as more evidence unfolds, we will regard religious projection

as a waste of time. And until someone can show me a better measure of

reality, I can only go by what most people agree on - or will agree on - as

reality as we can know it. I may just be a little ahead of the curve.

I am not necessarily advocating that anybody else adopt my understanding,

but I do have an archetype that feels the need to help where I can...or be

" right, " I suppose, if I want to be a little more honest about it. " Right "

to me is interpreting *evidence* effectively, not following emotion or

experience (the biggest trickster). I like to think that my emotion and

experience follows evidence, rather than the other way around. And it is my

personality to blab about what I think is right.

Cov

[Guest guest]

I think I've mentioned before that the sanskrit, Tibetan and Chinese words for

'mind' ALL also mean 'heart. An interesting point in this connection is that,

when vehemently referring to oneself, one is far more likely to be pointing

one's forefinger at one's chest than at one's forehead.

Of course religious experience is a function of the 'mind' - of the 'awareness'

-

*everything* is a function of the awareness as I never tire of pointing out - No

mind, no awareness. No awareness, no subjective or objective experiences

at all. That the brain - in tandem with the various other plexes of nerves and

subtle energy channels throughout the body - is the seat of certain aspects

of awareness has been fairly common knowledge in yogic circles for about

the past 5000 years give or take a week. The point is that 'knowing' - ANY

knowing - is NOT *only* a function of the brain, but of the gestalt itself. If

any

pole of the consciousness is removed, the corresponding awareness will

disappear with it. If any pole is underdeveloped, the corresponding

awareness will be underdeveloped and, consequently, skewed. That's what

'knowing' is about... one's own version.

m

[Guest guest]

Dear Jung-Fire friends,

I wish to thank all of you who have posted on such monumentally real topics

as The Grail, The Mind and also The Heart, since my return here a week ago.

I was commenting to Ghazaleh recently how much this group never ceases to

amaze me with the quality of its sharings of information, ideas and emotional

concerns. Someone I admire once said, " For me there is only the traveling of

paths, and only if that path has a Heart. " With so many paths each of us has

to choose from in our lives each day, how does one go about making a good

choice with the required Heart? A good path always gives us clues, signs and

wonders to follow.

The diversity of this group has a very interesting feature in that it

requires very little help in keeping itself regulated, like a good Heart

should. When matters and topics become too lopsided, someone can always find

a good counterpoint balance to keep things flowing better. I think Covert's

concern that this group was getting a bit too " Religious " was a great

counterpoint to the previous discussions including the proverbial Grail. The

physiological aspects of our being or group were becoming a bit constipated

somewhat with a predominance of aetheral issues in these discussions. The

discoveries currently being made in medical sciences should lead to a better

understanding of our lives on a variety of levels including spiritual ones

and not only our physical functioning. All too often though it seems as if

we would like to keep these two aspects of our lives in separate domains.

The reasons for this are prehaps the imposition of having to learn new

terminologies, processes etc. that come with any new understanding.

Spirituality and Science still has a lot of ground to cover before all the

connections between the two are harmonized into a cohesive domain. For me,

the word " Religion " and its root meaning " Re-ligare " , to Re-tie, needs to be

viewed in this context. And the focal point for the primary connection

between these " apparently separate " domains is the Heart. But it seems also,

that Science has somehow managed to take the lead in making new discoveries,

and Spirituality is becoming more or less a rehash of worn out modes of

ideas, convictions, and even gods and goddesses for some, and little is being

done to reformulate our perceptions of Spiritual issues so that new

discoveries can be madein this domain likewise.

I have my own personal path to attend to which doesn't exclude others, but

many here would probably find that path a bit exasperating to try to follow.

For me, " The Mystical " aspects of Life are always going to outweigh " The

Phyiscal " simply because of the limited nature of my physical being. But to

neglect the Physical aspect would be to limit my Mystical pursuits. In a

sense, we are always seeking new treasures and discoveries, in whatever

perceptional form that term means to us. Such activity is intrinsic to our

unique individuation as Jung would say perhaps. And the sharing of our

unique treasures with others allows us a better opportunity to do just that.

What good is finding the proverbial " Grail " (whatever it is), if there is no

one else to share in the aware of it? LOL! Since my return to this group I

have already made several new discoveries concerning my own special project

that I would probably never had found if I hadn't returned, and these

discoveries simply couldn't arise without adjusting my perceptions, or

perhaps as the coined term applies, " Asking the right questions. " That does

my own heart a great deal of good as I head off on a much needed vacation

which will do the rest of me some good as well. So once again, thanks for

the sharing, and when I return maybe some of you will be interested in what

those discoveries were.

Love to all here at Jung-Fire,

W. Dail

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 5/7/1 6:08:40 PM, Mutt wrote:

<<So once again, thanks for

the sharing, and when I return maybe some of you will be interested in what

those discoveries were. >>

I especially, will be looking forward to your return . I know you

will make many discoveries while away. I remember some from the past and

look forward to seeing and hearing from you upon your return. I especially

agreed with this part of your post today.

<< But it seems also,

that Science has somehow managed to take the lead in making new discoveries,

and Spirituality is becoming more or less a rehash of worn out modes of

ideas, convictions, and even gods and goddesses for some, and little is being

done to reformulate our perceptions of Spiritual issues so that new

discoveries can be made in this domain likewise. >>

until we meet again,

merry

[Guest guest]

Cov,

All I can say is if you made it this far without killing any mammals, my hat

is off to you. Out here in the great plains we were instructed to hunt early

in life - be it fowl or four-legged. As a child, I always thought is was for

the fun of the kill. But then I later I determined that it was a

reconnection with nature idea, to remind us that not too many generations

ago we did have to kill to survive. That sounds primitive, but some human

does have to kill all the cattle and swine we eat after all, whether we like

the idea or not. And, while I haven't become a vegetarian yet, I now

consider myself more akin to the hunted than the hunter. Life does involve a

lot of uneducation. My own sons couldn't imagine how it would be fun to go

hunting, even if survival were at risk. They never developed a taste for

that kind of pleasure. Perhaps I have let the next generation down. But I

have given up on becoming perfect-in this lifetime.

I think your analogy here (i.e. the squirrel::your car, like man::universe

is an interesting one. I am reminded of two things. One is how Maureen used

to always quote from the Tao (the way the Universe really works put in

metaphorical terms), which I miss. And also Jung's comment one time - If we

ignore life long enough, it will hit us. That poor squirrel's last moments

was probably an equally big surprise to both of you. There was no sport of

malicious intent. Just bad timing.

Greg

>I was conscious of killing my first mammal

> in the road on Saturday. I have long prided myself in being able to avoid

> squirrels and other animals in the road.

> But this time I could not brake in time. A squirrel will dash into the

road

> before he sees a car coming. When he (or she, of course) is startled by

it,

> he will use his natural instinct and quickly reverse direction. If a big

cat

> had been chasing the squirrel, this avoidance mechanism might have

allowed

> it to escape the cat, which could not have reversed direction as readily.

> But the car is not a cat, and it is not chasing the squirrel. It is just

> going where it is going.

>

> When humans view things that they do not understand in an egocentric way,

> like the squirrel views the car, they can likewise get run over by it.

Time

> spent treating the universe like a squirrel treats a car, may be

aliveness

> time lost through ignorance.

>

> When I realized in my little est training that the universe had little to

do

> with me, I just went home to my wife and I can tell you that I started to

> live at that moment. What I am saying is that I had a rebirth of sorts.

_______________________________________________________

Send a cool gift with your E-Card

http://www.bluemountain.com/giftcenter/

[Guest guest]

<< That the brain - in tandem with the various other plexes of nerves and

subtle energy channels throughout the body - is the seat of certain aspects

of awareness has been fairly common knowledge in yogic circles for about

the past 5000 years give or take a week. The point is that 'knowing' - ANY

knowing - is NOT *only* a function of the brain, but of the gestalt itself.

If any

pole of the consciousness is removed, the corresponding awareness will

disappear with it. If any pole is underdeveloped, the corresponding

awareness will be underdeveloped and, consequently, skewed. That's what

'knowing' is about... one's own version.

>>

Great post Mike, will you speak more to this, please? Thanks and L*L*L ~ bo

[Guest guest]

I do not understand the meaning of " spirituality " in this context.

Surely " religion " can be accused of being more or less a rehash of worn

out modes, because religion deals with doctrine and dogma, and those can

be restated.

I probably have a different understanding of " spirituality " And

" spiritual issues'? New discoveries.?

In my understanding of ' spiritual " , I can say my spirituality is my

personal relationship with my Imago- Dei, my image of an image.Since my

experiences come from the unconscious, how are scientific studies likely

to change them? Spiritual " convictions " as mentioned by Mrmailmit, can

hardly be 'outmoded " if I am having numinous dreams and experiences

today, can they? Can " meaning " change because of scientific discoveries?

" Rehash " sounds like a mental exercise and would qualify as " religious " ,

but one's own spirituality is molded by one's personal experiences, I

believe, one's heart as he says..

Since Myths have been the basis for our religious beliefs throughout the

ages, I do not see how science is likely to change the human heart. We

will embellish and change those myths in each civilization, but I wonder

if the hunger for meaning and the Ultimate will change.

Jung says his archetypes are left over from primitive man, and the

collective unconscious. What scientific knowledge will change the archetypes?

I guess what I am saying is that a personal relationship with, and

experience of, our truth will depend on our becoming more conscious. Our

spiritual life, our relationship with the Self can grow deeper, but how

would scientific medical discoveries change ` the Self-soul, or the heart?

Would love to hear what others understand by what wrote. Am I

wearing blinders?

Toni

Mrmailmut@... wrote:

> But it seems also,

> that Science has somehow managed to take the lead in making new discoveries,

> and Spirituality is becoming more or less a rehash of worn out modes of

> ideas, convictions, and even gods and goddesses for some, and little is being

> done to reformulate our perceptions of Spiritual issues so that new

> discoveries can be madein this domain likewise.

>

> I have my own personal path to attend to which doesn't exclude others, but

> many here would probably find that path a bit exasperating to try to follow.

> For me, " The Mystical " aspects of Life are always going to outweigh " The

> Phyiscal " simply because of the limited nature of my physical being. But to

> neglect the Physical aspect would be to limit my Mystical pursuits. In a

> sense, we are always seeking new treasures and discoveries, in whatever

> perceptional form that term means to us. Such activity is intrinsic to our

> unique individuation as Jung would say perhaps. And the sharing of our

> unique treasures with others allows us a better opportunity to do just that.

>