[The Heart of the Matter] [Growing Pains] [The Miracle of Sex]
[Living in the Shadow][The Release]

The Five Layers of Mind
“Difficulties strengthen the mind, as well as labour does the body.” – Seneca
An interesting question that arises from The Heart of the Matter is how we should respond to the demands of our heart versus that of our head?
By the head I’m referring to our cognitive ability, and particularly the capacity we have in our Rationaliser Mind. And by the heart I’m not necessarily referring to the heart as a physical organ, but rather the greater capacity we have to connect with our deeper levels of mind. Usually the heart is also associated with the Soul as it also appears to be directly connected to the dynamics responsible for our life’s unfolding.
The issue of whether one should follow one’s heart or one’s head once again raises an interesting dilemma. And as it tends to be with human nature, a mutually exclusive approach seems be the order of the day. It is that we find one faction vociferously advocating that one should trust one’s heart regardless. While another arguing that one should have a more cautious approach by always seriously deliberating the facts at hand with our heads.
Though based on the evidence discussed in the beginning of this work – having proven that the heart somehow can foretell the future – those with the view that the heart should lead the way would justifiably feel their particular point of view now should hold sway.
But once again I have to be a party spoiler and say that the issues are not as clear cut. And to start my argument, consider the following question.
If one is to teach an infant from birth that he should follow his heart, what do you think the result would be?
In a sense when an infant comes into this world he is all heart, while not having significant cognitive ability to speak of. And at this very early stage, also having no sense of fear of his new earthly environment either.
However this changes very soon after birth when he begins to encounter negative stimulus from this very inhospitable, and indeed very dangerous, environment. And so through fearing the potential negative consequences of his actions, the new human begins to develop a somewhat realistic association with this apparently hostile world. In other words in infancy we develop an initial orientation towards the world that is developed through the Sensor, and the painful neurological responses that emanates from the various environmental stimuli.
To emphasise the importance of the Sensor in our early childhood development, a very little known fact is that one of the most debilitating physiological afflictions is the inability to feel pain of any kind. In fact as we ordinarily think about it, this is a state of being that many would desire. However it is the most horrifying experience to witness the lives of those so affected, while they are oblivious to the destruction they are causing unto themselves.
What is remarkable is that such children may otherwise have had normal mental function, but because of the inability to experience any pain are incapable of experiencing life constructively as any other child would. Because they cannot feel anything they may gouge out their eyes without knowing it. Continually bleed, carrying infections because of they always have open wounds as they unknowingly will cut and pierce themselves with sharp objects. Break their bones because they would carelessly jump off extra-ordinarily scary heights without caring about it at all and then unknowingly walk around with fractured bones protruding through their skin.
Ffurther what is not realised, is that our emotions are also related to our ability to feel pain. As such they also will tend not to have any emotional feeling whatsoever. They therefore are fearless, and do not feel limited by what others would ordinarily feel compelled to avoid.
This is because the ability to experience the consequences of any chosen action, and particularly to feel the pain associated with taking an unwise course, is a fundamental faculty forcing us to live constructively ordered lives.
© Newton Fortuin – 2006


Salon.com
Comments
peece,
dj
I noticed the feed.
metanese 'rated' it.
I would if I knew it.
metanese loved this.
I hope I spells rights.
This needs read again.
you sure give us alotta homework, logos..back later
I’m still waiting until we can find time to savor this and your even newer pieces, but I did want to ask about the delicious diagrams that appear at the top of this and the previous post. Are these part of your manuscript? These are intellectual truffles—only far more nutritious. Can’t wait to feast on more.
—Melissa
In any event, this is what the second manuscript is about, how to achieve that magical alignment, while the first book investigates the scientific basis for claiming that there are those deeper levels of reality. In fact what I’m arguing for is that all these deeper levels are aspects of mind, and that beyond rational perception, all is mind. In fact what I'm inferring is that the deeper layers of reality are only mind and spirit. But what about the physical world, it most certainly exists from the perspective of the Sensor, and should be acknowledged as such, but from a modeling perspective, it merely is an aspect of the surface of our mind. Complicated, but I attempted to break it down systematically within a trilogy I titled About Life, the third of which Finding Heaven I haven’t touched on for more than four years. But thanks for the interest.
Aurobindo said this in "On Yog", which i read last night .....ha....
"we msut assume that the supreme Existence
is not an abstaction
or a state of existence,
but a conscious Being..."
Pull that little snippet apart. He is say ing its not an abstraction.
What isnt?....the supreme existence.
well, when we humans hear language like that we immediately go all weird in the head....supreme existence, we say...ach, we say....
but supreme means: not only HIGHEST IN RANK AND AUTHORITY (ie Jehovah, the Christian God)
but highest in degree...ultimate......highest in quality (like you)
from superus, upper...simply the top of the
head, i guess...ha....whichis the bottom, whichis all the in-betweens......
it is spirit...what-is-ness...what is now, ness...here & now ness.....
which is , um, stay with me here as i untangle this....
(take a drink of water...in the old days, it woulda been beer.....)
(this is spirit...unfolding of thought....)
so its not an abstraction...a pulling off-ness...it is isness, fully concrete universality, to go hegelian on ya....ha....
it s not a "state of existence"...it IS existence...ex- meaning out , um, " out of" ie out of, out of -ing, standing out, to go heideggerian....
istence, which means....is- tence....um, you figure that out...ah, there it is.....sistere...to stand out.... so to out stand out, etc...ay yi yi...
you get it...it means this:
i have unfolded the meaning of that magnificent passage in a way Auro wdve a-pproved of...
and the night is jung...i mean young...and i am drunk on love and shall cause all kinds of trubbel tonight unless Some One
ha
stops my ass, which aint real likely....
jme