>
>

Thinking without the brain

by

Mieke Mosmuller

04-12-2019 16 comments Print!
When we look back to Krishna, Zarathustra, Adam Kadmon, we can see the images that point to an original ideal human being, who is ideal and original at the same time, and who has a perfect outer and inner shape. We can see it as a great cosmic example which was there in the beginning and can be there in the future again. The I is not created to remain this limited, selfish being that is held by three layers that confine it forever: the physical, the ethereal and the astral bodies. As soon as it can become its true being, it develops its great cosmic shape. We see this in the different religions in different imaginations.

'Religion' of our time, which is natural science, has no better image than the DNA, this spectrum of the human being. When one tries to experience this image, one feels the 'Weltschmerz' because of an era that is so confined and still thinks so much of itself. If we really had to believe that the superb being of the objective I was fully explained by something like the spectrum of the DNA, we could only become desperate...

The human stature, the physical body, is the true image of the objective I. The grandeur of the brain, the central nerve system, points to the grandeur of the human I. Artificial intelligence struggles to equal this eminence.

But in modern times we have to see the human I as an eminent individual being, not as a being that is distributed to all human beings. Of course we have to feel the source from which we have taken this individual drop - but it has become an individual being that should develop itself in that way, so that it can learn to play symphonies with all the other human beings. And this individual being is not confined to a life between birth and death, it exceeds these borders.

In anatomy books we can see the brain drawn as a 'grey mass', with a white marrow. We can see wonderful windings that don't match any mathematical laws. It is like a labyrinth . There is an extensive knowledge about all the localizations of the functions. Still, when we immerse ourselves in this knowledge, we experience how poor it actually is. I don't mean that science hasn't come far in gaining knowledge. I mean that the most important human disposition is not acknowledged.

It seems to be impossible to give this disposition a name, because immediately all kinds of religious and philosophical notions and prejudices arise - that are certainly meant here, but which should be considered in a far more concrete way than usual.

Man can learn to think without the brain being active. That this is true is an immediate experience for the one who can think that way. One needs no proof for that - although one would like to find proof, to be able to convince others... It is the greatest discovery one can make. For it gives absolute proof that the human being is immortal. From the moment one experiences this, the whole world could shout that it is pure nonsense - and it still would not overturn ones conviction. One would see it as poor self-knowledge. Man is locked up in 'Plato's cave', and has forgotten that there is a world outside the cave. The one that can escape knows how the true world is, but if he comes back to his former fellow-prisoners they mostly don't want to hear a single word about this true world - let alone that they would want to be liberated...

Mieke Mosmuller

Plato's Allegory of the Cave by Jan Saenredam, according to Cornelis van Haarlem, 1604,Albertina, Vienna

(Repeat publication from 11/19/2019)

Thinking without the brain by Mieke Mosmuller

Give your comment please





Comments
  • From Millie Goumans @
    Vanuit mijn hart weer dank voor dit blog.
  • From Bert Verschoor @
    Moesten ze groot op de voorpagina van de Volkskrant zetten!
    • From Machteld Rippen-Veenker @
      Inderdaad, wat een groots moment van een blog. En het is geen sprookje. Dat zou iedereen gegund zijn. Ik ga weer werven om de blog te lezen. Innige dank en liefs**
  • From @
    Wanneer we de gedachte toelaten en zelfstandig durven dóór te denken dat we vanuit aanwezigheid in de grot van Plato ons innerlijk kunnen omkeren en zo de Bron van Licht kunnen aanschouwen.....ontstaat de mogelijkheid ( nieuwe denkroute via ervaren) van bewust kijken zowel naar binnen, naar de Bron, als naar buiten, naar de geprojecteerde schaduwbeelden en zo het onderscheid te ervaren tussen illusie en werkelijkheid. Zo leren we de verschillende feed-backsystemen kennen van de Schaduwwereld en van de Lichtwereld. Het daagt ons uit tot het ontwikkelen van een nieuw denkkader gebaseerd op vrije wils-keuze.
  • From Sina @
    Ja, liebe Mieke. Und die Frage ist doch wohl, was das ICH da hinzog - in die Höhle. Liebe Grüße!
    • From Gert @
      Ik geniet van het volgen van deze blog & de commentaren! Telkens opnieuw verder geleid worden in het "out of the box" denken. En al dat potentieel ligt ook in mij besloten!
    • From Mieke Mosmuller @
      Ja, diese Frage begleitet mich auf meine 'Blog-Reise'... Wenn auch die Antwort klar da steht, muss sie doch wachsen.
  • From Bernhard Höne @
    Liebe Frau Mosmuller!

    Vielen Dank auch hier für diesen bemerkenswerten Beitrag!

    Ja, dass das Denken "funktioniert" auch o h n e ein physisches Gehirn war mir in gewisser Weise eigentlich immer schon klar: So konnte ich mir all die wunderbare Weisheit, Klugheit und Raffinesse in den Natur-Erscheinungen gar nicht anders erklären als "dahinter" ein höchst bewusstes l e b e n d i g e s Denken anzunehmen, welches sich mit absoluter Sicherheit durch u n s e r Denken finden lassen und zu erkennen geben müsse ("Gleiches erkennt Gleiches"). Nach einem W o zu fragen ist, finde ich, sinnlos: Das Denken/Denkende i s t einfach, hier, dort, überall...

    Tatsächlich hat die Naturwissenschaft sich die einzigartige Möglichkeit der Geist-Findung dadurch verunmöglicht, dass sie sich selbst in die Katakomben der materialistischen Befangenheit eingekerkert hat. Deshalb k a n n sie gar nicht anders, als das Denken und die Gedanken
    n o t w e n d i g als physisch verursacht bzw. erzeugt anzunehmen.

    Vielleicht könnte man das gehirn-unabhängige Denken durch die authentischen Berichte sogen. "Nahtod-Erlebnisse" wenigstens den v e r n ü n f t i g denkenden Zeitgenossen beweisen? - Augenblicklich weiß ich nicht, ob beim "Schein-Tod" tatsächlich sich ICH und Astralleib
    vom Körper v o l l s t ä n d i g gelöst haben; dann würde zumindest der scheinbar Tot-gewesene für sich selbst die absolute Gewissheit bekommen haben, dass seine bewussten Gedanken und auch intensiven Empfindungen sich g ä n z l i c h a u ß e r h a l b seines Leibes
    zustandegekommen waren...

    Herzliche Grüße!

    Bernhard Höne
    • From Mieke Mosmuller @
      Der Niederländische Kardiologe Pim van Lommel hat ein sehr interessantes Buch veröffentlich über diese Nahtod-Erlebnisse, mit denen er in seinem Beruf konfrontiert wurde. Beim Sterben geht es vor allem darum, dass der Ätherleib sich vom physischen Leib loslöst, das gibt diesen Überblick über das vergangene Leben, der auch durch Meditation erlangt werden kann.
  • From @
    Wer sieht, dass er in der "Höhle" lebt, lebt nicht in der "Höhle"
    • From Mieke Mosmuller @
      Ja, das wäre der 'Ausnahmezustand' (Philosophie der Freiheit von Rudolf Steiner).
  • From Jerry Leach @
    Dear Mieke,
    In your previous posting you stated that the objective I "breaks through in every enlightenment by true understanding - by insight." Can it be that this direct experience, this self evident certainty, is a brain-free thinking? Also, I am wondering if, in your research, you have found any medical or otherwise "scientific proof" cases of individuals who have had this experience of thinking without the brain?

    Warm regards, Jerry
    • From Mieke Mosmuller @
      Yes, this enlightenment by true understanding that occurs in every intuition of insight is certainly a brain-free experience. Everyone has this free thinking and the world would really change if more and more people would realize this.
      As far as I know, there is no scientific proof that is accepted by science. But we can read a lot about near-death experiences, for instance in the book: ‘Consciousness beyond Life. The Science of the Near-Death Experience‘. of Pim van Lommel, a Dutch cardiologist, who describes his vision on this, based on his experiences with patients who have been 'nearly dead'. Of course he has become a lot of criitics...
      • From Jerry Leach @
        Many thanks for your reply! Yes, I have found that some individuals who usually think solely within the "cave" of science-proven sense experience are interested in
        the reports of near-death experiences. I have just ordered a copy of Pim van Lommel's book.

  • From Willem @
    The brain does think, it's a sense-based thinking, using fallen ether as energy source (electricity). This in contrast to heart thinking, which is pure thinking, sense-free thinking and lives in sound ether. This thinking originates from our heart and is only reflected in our brain.
  • From Maureen Havas-D’Andrea @
    Love hearing it.
    Thank you for your words