|
Post by laughter on Oct 5, 2017 12:24:45 GMT -5
Jesus Christ perhaps already conducted EEGs on his disciples. It says from a prayer Apostle's Creed, " ... He is seated at the right hand of the Father and will come to judge the living and the dead. " The answer is in the right brain hemisphere ( devotional worship ). Non-dualism is in the left. Cool, that makes a lot of sense. Yeah I agree that non-duality is in the left hemisphere. The right hemisphere is where, neurologists agree, identity is formed. I'd say they're wrong then. Not because it's formed in the left either. Peeps identities make sense to them. Both sides contribute to it.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Oct 5, 2017 12:28:14 GMT -5
Bakk, best avatar ever! Is the seahorse bringing that Q-tip to the monkey in the parka??
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 5, 2017 15:22:04 GMT -5
Bakk, best avatar ever! Is the seahorse bringing that Q-tip to the monkey in the parka??
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Oct 5, 2017 17:45:47 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by krsnaraja on Oct 5, 2017 19:33:06 GMT -5
Jesus Christ perhaps already conducted EEGs on his disciples. It says from a prayer Apostle's Creed, " ... He is seated at the right hand of the Father and will come to judge the living and the dead. " The answer is in the right brain hemisphere ( devotional worship ). Non-dualism is in the left. Cool, that makes a lot of sense. Yeah I agree that non-duality is in the left hemisphere. The right hemisphere is where, neurologists agree, identity is formed. The Apostle's Creed says the Son is seated at the right hand of the Father is ipsilateral to the brain. It means the left part of the brain controls the right side of the body. A right hemiplegic patient has damaged brain in the left. In other words, Christ Jesus teachings are in the left side of his Father's brain? Because the Son sits at the right hand of the Father? So, my question: What did Jesus Christ teach to his disciples? Non-dualism or dualism? Whatever it is Christ's teachings are found in the left side of his Father's brain.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Oct 5, 2017 20:58:18 GMT -5
Cool, that makes a lot of sense. Yeah I agree that non-duality is in the left hemisphere. The right hemisphere is where, neurologists agree, identity is formed. The Apostle's Creed says the Son is seated at the right hand of the Father is ipsilateral to the brain. It means the left part of the brain controls the right side of the body. A right hemiplegic patient has damaged brain in the left. In other words, Christ Jesus teachings are in the left side of his Father's brain? Because the Son sits at the right hand of the Father? So, my question: What did Jesus Christ teach to his disciples? Non-dualism or dualism? Whatever it is Christ's teachings are found in the left side of his Father's brain. What makes you think one has anything to do with the other?
|
|
|
Post by krsnaraja on Oct 5, 2017 21:24:56 GMT -5
The Apostle's Creed says the Son is seated at the right hand of the Father is ipsilateral to the brain. It means the left part of the brain controls the right side of the body. A right hemiplegic patient has damaged brain in the left. In other words, Christ Jesus teachings are in the left side of his Father's brain? Because the Son sits at the right hand of the Father? So, my question: What did Jesus Christ teach to his disciples? Non-dualism or dualism? Whatever it is Christ's teachings are found in the left side of his Father's brain. What makes you think one has anything to do with the other? There's duality in the left and right. There are opposing philosophies, duality and non-duality. It's there in the left and right side of the brain. Those who are engaged in non-duality must be using their left side of the brain. Those engaged in duality must be using the right side of the brain. To settle this argument, Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu came up with this philosophy. Acintya-bheda-abheda-tattva. That non-duality and duality are simultaneously one and yet different. Actually, the original saying goes this way, the self and God is simultaneously one and yet they are different. One is greater, the other is less great. Krsna however tells his student Arjuna to transcend them and be situated in the self as servant of God. That is the soul's original constitutional position.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2017 2:13:19 GMT -5
Please explain to me how you are thinking I will deny my own experience in favour of a google. And more importantly tell me which area of your brain is sourcing such an idea.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Oct 6, 2017 4:44:37 GMT -5
What makes you think one has anything to do with the other? There's duality in the left and right. There are opposing philosophies, duality and non-duality. It's there in the left and right side of the brain. Those who are engaged in non-duality must be using their left side of the brain. Those engaged in duality must be using the right side of the brain. To settle this argument, Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu came up with this philosophy. Acintya-bheda-abheda-tattva. That non-duality and duality are simultaneously one and yet different. Actually, the original saying goes this way, the self and God is simultaneously one and yet they are different. One is greater, the other is less great. Krsna however tells his student Arjuna to transcend them and be situated in the self as servant of God. That is the soul's original constitutional position. The left brain = trees, and a verbal description, particular "trees". Right brain = forest, a sensation of the whole, a silent taking in. Left brain, I-dentity. Right brain, being-(ness). (I don't disagree with your analysis, just the reasoning of your assigned brain-halfs).
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Oct 6, 2017 4:54:26 GMT -5
Please explain to me how you are thinking I will deny my own experience in favour of a google. And more importantly tell me which area of your brain is sourcing such an idea. I consider it very admirable that you can distinguish within your own brain the local of certain attributes. I cannot do that, I only know the research of others. Thusly, left-brain = particular "trees"; right brain = whole forest. Left-brain favors verbal description of the particular; right-brain (ZD's)_______ _________. (Jill Bolte-Taylor is a neuroscientist who had a stroke, and so examined her own stroke within her own knowledge of neuroanatomy, fascinating).
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Oct 6, 2017 5:17:11 GMT -5
Yes (more or less). Are you saying you are present, all the time? I'm still laughing at what you wrote in brackets. Going a little further (more). Could you say Presence = aware of being aware? (self 1, awareness; self 2, awareness of awareness) And further still. self 1 = left brain; self 2 = right brain. (_________ of awareness). The Whole encompasses the particular. (The particular does not encompass the Whole). IOW, left brain, ego/fictitious I-dentity; right brain, essence. The OP, The mind is not identical with the mind, astute.
|
|
|
Post by krsnaraja on Oct 6, 2017 7:07:07 GMT -5
There's duality in the left and right. There are opposing philosophies, duality and non-duality. It's there in the left and right side of the brain. Those who are engaged in non-duality must be using their left side of the brain. Those engaged in duality must be using the right side of the brain. To settle this argument, Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu came up with this philosophy. Acintya-bheda-abheda-tattva. That non-duality and duality are simultaneously one and yet different. Actually, the original saying goes this way, the self and God is simultaneously one and yet they are different. One is greater, the other is less great. Krsna however tells his student Arjuna to transcend them and be situated in the self as servant of God. That is the soul's original constitutional position. The left brain = trees, and a verbal description, particular "trees". Right brain = forest, a sensation of the whole, a silent taking in. Left brain, I-dentity. Right brain, being-(ness). (I don't disagree with your analysis, just the reasoning of your assigned brain-halfs). I wonder why there's no one here interested in the pineal gland.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Oct 6, 2017 10:44:53 GMT -5
The left brain = trees, and a verbal description, particular "trees". Right brain = forest, a sensation of the whole, a silent taking in. Left brain, I-dentity. Right brain, being-(ness). (I don't disagree with your analysis, just the reasoning of your assigned brain-halfs). I wonder why there's no one here interested in the pineal gland. Start a thread.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2017 13:42:41 GMT -5
Please explain to me how you are thinking I will deny my own experience in favour of a google. And more importantly tell me which area of your brain is sourcing such an idea. I consider it very admirable that you can distinguish within your own brain the local of certain attributes. I cannot do that, I only know the research of others. Thusly, left-brain = particular "trees"; right brain = whole forest. Left-brain favors verbal description of the particular; right-brain (ZD's)_______ _________. (Jill Bolte-Taylor is a neuroscientist who had a stroke, and so examined her own stroke within her own knowledge of neuroanatomy, fascinating). Can't you feel?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2017 13:43:53 GMT -5
I'm still laughing at what you wrote in brackets. Going a little further (more). Could you say Presence = aware of being aware? (self 1, awareness; self 2, awareness of awareness) And further still. self 1 = left brain; self 2 = right brain. (_________ of awareness). The Whole encompasses the particular. (The particular does not encompass the Whole). IOW, left brain, ego/fictitious I-dentity; right brain, essence. The OP, The mind is not identical with the mind, astute. A few days ago self 1 was a fiction, a story, that couldn't see or understand.. now you've promoted it to awareness. Please explain the leap.
|
|