Neurobiology of the faith

[Samkhya]

Hello,

 

Have you read «why god won't go away»? The author of the book tells us that the deep feeling of oneness with everything experienced by mystics is explained by the fact that the area of the brain which is responsible for creating the sensation of a limited, physically defined body, no longer receives the sensory inputs which allow it to work normally. As a result, the sensation of a limited and defined body disappears and what is experienced instead is a feeling of oneness with all the reality. This explanation is supported by a brain imaging technique which shows us that the activity in this area is diminished while a meditative exercise is performed.

 

I could give more details. The book is beside me.

[Guest guest]

Please give more detail.

[maadhav]

<< the deep feeling of oneness with everything experienced by mystics is explained by the fact that the area of the brain which is responsible for creating the sensation of a limited, physically defined body, no longer receives the sensory inputs which allow it to work normally. As a result, the sensation of a limited and defined body disappears and what is experienced instead is a feeling of oneness with all the reality. >>

 

it seems you are an atheist and trying to imply that if some one feels unitly with all then it is some disorder in brain.

 

when one feels one with all due to his spiritual advancement, then due to his high position, sure some change will happen in his mind, brain, body. that then is the consequence not the cause.

 

some one perhaps may get some defect in his body or mind and feel he is one with all when actually he is not.

 

there is a difference between the above two: real and non real. one's ataions sometimes become miraculus as if god is helping him directly, while the other remains just as an ordinar man.

 

as one advances spiritually, his body, mind, brian function, thinking, world view changes as a consequence.

that is why in a given situation, a saintly person thinks and acts differently than an ordinary man.

 

saints actually are the spiritual advisors of mankind.

 

sainthood in the vedic culture is not attained by passing some exam or conferred by some human.

 

in some other culures, one who is not a saint declres other as saint, and the rest are expected to tahe his word.

not in hinduism.

 

[Guest guest]

neurobiology of the faith is like the neurobiology of love

 

one can put needles, make analysis and examine wih instruments the body of someone who is in love with his girl or boy and fill up computer's hard disks with numbers and results

 

but actually what hope he has to really understand what's love?

[Samkhya]

««« and trying to imply that if some one feels unitly with all then it is some disorder in brain.

 

when one feels one with all due to his spiritual advancement, then due to his high position, sure some change will happen in his mind, brain, body. that then is the consequence not the cause. »»»

 

I would not use the word «disorder». It is certainly an unusual state of the brain, but I do not see any evidence that it is a pathology.

 

I don't believe that the state of the brain described above is a CONSEQUENCE of the mental experience of the mystic. It is more logical to hold that the changes in the brain GENERATE the mystical experience.

 

Why is it more logical? Because we know that the normal functioning of the Orientation Association Area, that I have alluded to in my first message, is responsible for the feeling of a limited body. In other words, it is the CAUSE of such a feeling. But, the feeling of oneness with all the things is the opposite of this feeling. Therefore, we can expect that the feeling of oneness will occur when the Orientation Association Area does not work in a normal way.

 

More precisely, what enables the normal functioning of the Orientation Association Area is a constant sensory input. But, when the level of the sensory input is lower, the feeling of a defined body fades accordingly. And at which time is the sensory input lower? During meditation!

 

[Guest guest]

non-existence of God.

 

 

 

"I don't believe that the state of the brain described above is a CONSEQUENCE of the mental experience of the mystic. It is more logical to hold that the changes in the brain GENERATE the mystical experience.

 

Why is it more logical? Because we know that the normal functioning of the Orientation Association Area, that I have alluded to in my first message, is responsible for the feeling of a limited body. In other words, it is the CAUSE of such a feeling. But, the feeling of oneness with all the things is the opposite of this feeling. Therefore, we can expect that the feeling of oneness will occur when the Orientation Association Area does not work in a normal way.

 

More precisely, what enables the normal functioning of the Orientation Association Area is a constant sensory input. But, when the level of the sensory input is lower, the feeling of a defined body fades accordingly. And at which time is the sensory input lower? During meditation! "

 

 

Yes, what you say is true, I've even read a CNN article discussing how in meditation that part of the brain responsible for space/time is diminished. HOWEVER, at the same time another part of the brain is more active, and people who have meditated for longer periods also are more creative in their problem-solving. They think outside the box more, and they learn at a better rate than those who don't meditate much.

 

Your very arguments that the normal functioning of the brain are the CAUSE of feeling limited to the body is nothing more than a statement of the obvious. Read about Vedanta and you'll notice the Vedic rishis KNOW the only way to find oneness with everything is to still the mind and to cause physiological alterations within the brain so there is no recognition by the brain of sensory input.

 

 

I think you have some perverse idea of how everything plays out in a mystical trance. As if all of this is manifested through magic, when there ARE physiological correlations with what happens spiritually. It seems you believe that being in a mystical trance and seeing God, you should remain unchanged in order to observe God. And yet, even the Heisenberg principle states that even the mere act of observation influences the action that is being observed, and vice versa.

 

This is a chicken or the egg problem at its most basic element. Which comes first: the mystical trance, or the cessation of the Orientation Association Area? My belief is neither one comes without the other. Simple meditation will not cause the loss of input to the Orientation Association Area at an almost complete level. Yes, other parts of the brain are active when meditating, and the Orientation Association Area gets less attention, but it's not to the point where there is a mystical trance achieved. However, there is another element that comes into play here. Upon meditation, if done long enough, ANOTHER part of the brain, at the bottom stem, located in the base of the spinal cord, the muladhara chakra is where a large amount of bioelectric energy is stored. At some point, the brain triggers the activation of this bioelectric energy (known as Shakti) to ascend the spine and enter the base of the brain and trigger physiological changes within the brain. THIS is what truly causes the change in brain function, and the true redirection away from the Orientation Association Area, and thus the mystical trance. However, it would not have been activated without the initial input required from meditation.

 

Again, this is simply just another feedback mechanism, typical of most body functions. At the same time it does not indicate the non-existence of God. These newly discovered scientific facts are easily assimilated into our belief system, so where does the conflict arise? In any case, the fact that our brain chemistry changes upon meditation is hardly news. Only recently did scientists even begin to explore or have the means to investigate this.

 

There was a belief system in India called the Charvaka system (which I guess you would gladly be a part of), that believed that our experience of God is simply a product of alterations in the brain chemistry and nothing more, thus people should live for the present and do whatever pleased them, good or bad, as there is no cosmic order to anything. While they were right that brain chemistry is interrelated with mystical trances, to say one came before the other is a logical fallacy, and it's pseudo-intellectual babble. What they fail to recognize, and what scientists unfortunately are neglecting to recognize in their investigations is PURPOSE behind what they discover.

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

why many people can receive shaktipat from a guru and feel that "oneness" through the simple gesture of a hand on their head.

[Samkhya]

««« There was a belief system in India called the Charvaka system (which I guess you would gladly be a part of), that believed that our experience of God is simply a product of alterations in the brain chemistry and nothing more »»»

 

Yes, it is precisely what is at stake with the recent discoveries.

 

Here is the reasoning:

 

Let us say that B is the opposite of A

 

State A of the brain (normal level of sensory input) -> State A of the mind (sensation of a defined body)

 

Physiological changes

 

State B of the brain (reduced level of sensory input) -> State B of the mind (reduced sensation of a defined body, that which amounts to a stronger feeling of a limitless mind, hence the feeling of oneness with everything

 

It is mere logic, and the state B has nothing supernatural. It is natural, however, that this state could be misunderstood on account of a lack of knowledge and construed as an insight into the Ultimate Reality.

 

[Guest guest]

physiological trait associated with spirituality. The God gene, which also helps to indicate how spiritual you are.

 

And it still has no problem with what I believe. The God gene could easily be a genetic marker by God indicating your spiritual progress or the level of spirituality you are at after having reincarnated a number of times.

 

It's foolish to assume that physilogical changes are completely distinct from spiritual progress and vice versa.

[Guest guest]

Dear Sam

 

Marerialism thinking is putting cart before the horse -- though apparently not so. To make us realise that thoughts precede materialisation, Vedas are there.

 

Physiological changes are caused by what? Do they happen on their own. This is also known as play of Gunas of Prakriti. Modern biology teaches the gullible that the brain is all. Whereas when a man dies, the brain does not say: I will live more.

 

The whole body, including the brain exists within manas or mind which again exists within consciousness. The changes in brain are not caused by brain itself. It is simply a temporary apparatus.

 

So, seeing oneness is much deeper than just changes in brain. These changes are just consequences.

 

Have you heard about bio feedback, wherein using machines the wave patterns emitting from the brain are altered? Yogis do it consciously.

 

Please put the horse before the cart if you wish.

[Samkhya]

««« what scientists unfortunately are neglecting to recognize in their investigations is PURPOSE behind what they discover. »»»

 

But in that case, there is nothing from which we can infer a purpose. The altered state of cousciousness is explained by mere naturalistic logic, and the author of «why God won't go away» also provides an evolutionary explanation of the «transcendent machinery».

 

Although the belief in a purpose is not forbidden, for it is not self-contradictory or contrary to facts, it has neither rational nor empirical ground.

 

[Guest guest]

"Yes, it is precisely what is at stake with the recent discoveries.

 

Here is the reasoning:

 

Let us say that B is the opposite of A

 

State A of the brain (normal level of sensory input) -> State A of the mind (sensation of a defined body)

 

Physiological changes

 

State B of the brain (reduced level of sensory input) -> State B of the mind (reduced sensation of a defined body, that which amounts to a stronger feeling of a limitless mind, hence the feeling of oneness with everything

 

It is mere logic, and the state B has nothing supernatural. It is natural, however, that this state could be misunderstood on account of a lack of knowledge and construed as an insight into the Ultimate Reality. "

 

The very idea that this "oneness" is caused by brain chemistry brings into question EVERYTHING that we understand about our perception of reality. For instance, BECAUSE the effect of closing off sensory input is a natural biological process, it brings into question the idea whether this is what nature has intended for us, whether this is the ultimate path we must take, where evolution is leading us to.

 

It does not give any indication as to whether God exists or not. To draw conclusions about God from learning about the biological process which is induced from meditation and which results in a meditative trance is foolishness and is the height of arrogance. There is no evidence to support or deny the existence of God. That is merely a matter of faith.

 

Also, you have to realize that the supernatural is not ruled out either simply because of brain chemistry. There is SOME indication that the mind can influence events by the simple act of observation at the quantum level. This also can apply at the macro level, given the strength of concentration and focus of the mind. Possibly enhanced by the alteration of brain chemistry when the shakti or bioelectric energy has altered the brain.

 

While God may come into question, the idea of the supernatural is unaffected by your statement that everything is a product of brain chemistry. And this is precisely where philosophy comes into play. Science cannot prove the existence of God empirically. There are arguments FOR and AGAINST the eexistence of God, even WITH these newfound discoveries, so the debate of whether God exists is pretty much unaffected by these discoveries. I think there would be just as many people satisfied in saying that there is a God with these newfound discoveries as there are just as many people who are skeptical of God's existence after learning of these newfound discoveries. In essence, nothing has changed, aside from our understanding of the physiological process of enlightenment.

 

[Samkhya]

««« The whole body, including the brain exists within manas or mind which again exists within consciousness. »»»

 

Sorry, but I don't grasp what you mean.

[maadhav]

<< normal functioning >>

 

what most consider normal may not be really normal in spiritual sense. krishna sats:

 

yAnishA sarva bhUtAnAm

tasyAm jAgarti samyami

yasyAm jagrati samyami

yAnishA pashato mune

 

in the western culure killing and eting cows is norlam.

in the vedic culture is is sin.

 

if any one is trying to prove that a state of spiritual advancement by which one relly feels unity with all

is a disorder caused by some chemicals in brain,

then it is not supportable by the vedic literature.

 

on a side point, this kind of thinking process leads to making friends by a pill or injection or gas inhalation.

 

in the kingdom of asuras, good guys are seen as with some mental disorder, and vice versa.

 

i would suggest that you experience first-hand unity with all by a vedic process, not by a medical process, and then you will realise that the chage in your brain was a result, not the cause of your condition.

 

to say chemical change made one feel one with all is a subtle way of denying the existance of god, and totally riducling the value of the vedic process of spiritual advancement.

 

it was seen on tv a few years ago that when a russian lady protested a russian political authority in public crowd, an injection was given to her to calm her down. did she became a friend instalty to the authority? no, she was forcibly disabled to present her point.

 

would it not be nice if a gas could be found such that

when breadthed, instantly the person would become a friend?

however, such things are not possible.

 

saddam used gas (as did hitler) to just kill kurds easily in large numbers.

 

comng back to the main point,

one needs to experience oneness with all or closeness to god, by a vedic process. it is not worth stuyding what happens inside the brain.

 

[Guest guest]

and thus the logical fallacies you are falling victim to:

 

 

"Yes, it is precisely what is at stake with the recent discoveries. "

 

Sorry, this ISN'T what is at stake with the recent discoveries. Whoever says it is, has a very narrow viewpoint limited only to themselves and isn't even considering other viewpoints. What IS at stake here is simply the understanding of what goes on in the body, and nothing more.

 

It's also arrogant to believe that the Vedic rishis weren't aware of what they were experiencing. You say you've read a summary of Vedanta. Have you even wondered as to what had spurred the rishis on to pursue this line of reasoning?

 

What these newfound discoveries should do is to cause people to question their perception of reality, to question everything. Not simply to question whether God exists, because that cannot be addressed from what we now know.

 

[Samkhya]

««« It does not give any indication as to whether God exists or not. »»»

 

You're right, it does not disprove the existence of God.

 

««« the debate of whether God exists is pretty much unaffected by these discoveries. I think there would be just as many people satisfied in saying that there is a God with these newfound discoveries as there are just as many people who are skeptical of God's existence after learning of these newfound discoveries. In essence, nothing has changed, aside from our understanding of the physiological process of enlightenment. »»»

 

I am not agree, in as much as such religious experiences could be used as a proof of God's existence (cf: Bergson). Today, this path is closed.

 

To be fair, The author of my book (Andrew Newberg) thinks that, since the mystics perceive these experiences as as real (objectively true) as - and even more real than - normal experiences - it is a sign that these experiences are objectively true. So Newberg has settled this criterion: the more an experience is perceived as objectively true, the more it IS objectively true. Thus, even if dreams are thought to be real during sleep, when awoken, dreams are perceived as unreal. The same applies to hallucinations.

 

But I am not agree with this reasoning: young children think that their dreams are as real as their waking experiences. This is presumably because their brain is not mature enough. But one can say that if the mystics perceive their experiences as real, it is because their brain is not mature enough to see their emptiness.

 

[Samkhya]

««« saddam used gas (as did hitler) to just kill kurds easily in large numbers. »»»

 

you have got a Godwin's point. ;-)

 

[Samkhya]

««« Sorry, this ISN'T what is at stake with the recent discoveries. Whoever says it is, has a very narrow viewpoint limited only to themselves and isn't even considering other viewpoints. What IS at stake here is simply the understanding of what goes on in the body, and nothing more. »»»

 

It is true, from a scientific standpoint. But, here we are interested in a philosophical viewpoint (view of the world). Of what use is such an inquiry into the biology of the faith if not philosophical?

[Guest guest]

You repeatedly say Samkhya philosophy takes you out of hole.

 

Will you please like to summarise briefly your way out of the hole. Then we can discuss what you did not understand in my post.

 

[maadhav]

do not know about it.