I will ceed to you the statement all eastern philosophers are fafs, largely because I said the same to George Feuerstein before he died… But the centering… Dude, come on.
If your a Nietzscheans, you abscribe to his egoist theory of how the body operates via reflexes, without aid necessarily of the mind. But he was also a psychologist, and made several statements that par with Osho here… as an INTJ (very regularly typed there, same as me and others… I’ve been called the poster child for Ni) have a great degree of control over our motor functions, the circuit that is the core for our personality type runs right through the right SMA in the mind.
When your like me, Jerome Card an, Aristotle you spend a big chunk of your time hiking and thinking. It is instinctive… we are always in thought, but the increased motor function makes it easier to think. Descartes (not a INTJ, but still sits in the right hemisphere, links up to the other side of that feedback loop, but NOT the SMA end, hence Cartesian Dualism- mind body seperation) thought going into the military as well would free up enoug time to think.
It doesnt free up time to “study” but does give you lots of solitary time to think. Most people go nuts in long guard shifts, not me. Why? I cam stand there, perform my functions robotically, and think simultaneously. External elements behave like extentions of my body. I am my enviroment. My movements are clunky due to a ideo-kenetic apraxia when recieving orders outside my mind from a superior, but like mozart, I can instantly formulate a plan, and set my body into much more elegant and better motion.
Why? All the SMAs do is process body, emotional, and intellectual information… Like the old time operators eho used to plug phones in.
John Boyd was a similar thinker, it is why I push his OODA Loop so much on this forum, some of our best human to AI sensor technology used in F-22s directky descend from his insights.
I made that diagram up to correct the other versions out on the net, noticed they got it backwards at points. Mine is also the most simplified.
In India, the most pure form of monism is the first green arrow on the chart… Pure perceiving, no judgment. What is, is, without the is.
From your extensive analysis, is just using a extended formulation of the Pythagorean table of opposites.
I brought up a few years back the further elaboration of this in Buddhism then Advaita Vedanta in the Uddhava Gita… Goes into much more detail. I put it in a post roughly labeled “Anal Tricks or Psychedelic Drugs”, but the troll named Zinnati got it banned (might still be around, just can’t post in it cause the mods are retards), but I asserted from a better knowledge base what your asserting in part… Did they link this stuff together through drug use like Soma and then later through extreme asceticism, causing neural transmitter extremes, such as the state experienced in starvation? I was dipping back into the older strata of Buddhist texts when the thread was rudely yanked from here by Zinnati’s nationalist ploy.
I pointed out, in the Srimad Bhagavatam (contains the Hamsa Gita, which us also the Uddhava Gita) the Hare Krishnans included in the original editions (but not the online editions, I searched it twice) a picture of a yogi sticking the heel of his foot up his ass, apparently stimulating the Vagus Nerve to kill him, or “transcend” as they put it. So hence my question, anal tricks or psychedelic drugs.
By default, given where the SMAs sit in the mind, the role they have in processing so many different kinds of information, they are the most expansive in terms of raw consciousness… We have the highest IQ ratings period. INTPs try to adjust it for language aptitude at times to get higher, but they generally flop most tests compared to other types. Not a very smart group in terms of raw intelligence.
Someone in my area, capable of “centering” doesn’t have much control over the thalamus. Sauwelios is the posterboy for that. It isn’t that I don’t have access to it, just isn’t a aspect I balance in the mind, coordinating. I mostly run it unconsciously.
They dont balance, but take the careful middle of the road, avoid all risks, take it easy and watch Downton Abbey aporoach to life. Ive seen many get involve easily in social scenes, use drugs, have causual sex, but it is always in the nothing in excess category, and bring rude and impulsive is the worst thing ever. They are all to the last voting for Hillary.
Im told the divisions between make and femake take place here. I can’t see it in my mind. If you notice on the wiki page for the pythagorean table of opposites, not all pythagoreans accepted Male-female as a opposite. Im aware they have a dualistic opposition, but it is a purely intellectual idea… I don’t look at random rocks and declare them Lingas… This stone has a male nature, this stone has a female nature. It is a fucking stone to me. I dont see sexyality in the forces, god is gender neutral… Only call God in the masculine because of English language traditions and indifference to change just because feminist demand me to. So I will call Mannequinn He, as It is insulying, but insist on cling Trixie He… Because that us what he us, I dont have this gender fluidity conscioys in my mind.
Stoucs tried to do this, calling all active forces in natute by their feminine, rewrote the greek gender use in language to do this… Like the song Inama Nushif… Forces of nature, or personal qualities of a female? It does sonething to me, feels beautiful, but I don’t see where at in the mind that occurs. If the others are right, the Thalamus makes a lot if sense, as it is my one cognitive blind spot it could hide in.
Saying you see male and female in everything is like telling a color blind person about colors. After a while, they will get colors exist, can see shades, use colorful expressions, but arent going to be walking around seeing colors.
I cant see sexual forces everywhere. I see it when animals are fucking, or in a pretty woman, or pornography… But everything isnt make and female to me. Englush only yses gender tense to refer to sex organs, and the sexual tense has to matxh to to the genitals in question. We can get artistic and call a ship “she” or name our gun Sally, but that is largely a joke, borrowed from literature.
If Osho was talking about centering the mind, he would of almost certainly been blind to any make-female duality in everything. I can’t see it in either the right or left when I switch. I only see it when it is obviously there. Sometimes in oddly misshapened tree trunks. I can see a cock on a statue. But other than the obvious, I’m not thinking wind is masculine and valley is feminine. I’m thinking in terms of geometric deposition of terrain types, colors, foilage, statistics for kinds of plants and animals, use of land, economy and culture, it’s history… It’s future. Never once have I stooped and said “masculine creek, feminine road”.
It just sounds foolish to me, and I’m prone to usually dismiss it as such… But I’m also read enough in psychology to know no personality type has absolute conscious control of the mind, and this aspect is missing.
Chances are, he just emphasized it so much because he couldn’t see it, but was so prevelant in the tantric thought of india. He theorized it, built up a scheme, found a willing audience for it, and focused of the emotive and motor skills of it, building up relationships. We tend to be very controlling in sex, dictating the nature of it, fantasy wise.
But so does a great many sex cuults, especially in Japan. I’m so far not seeing him step out of generic tantic philosophical assumptions Idia had since the Buddhist era at least. I’m not into it as a Christian, but you can tell by our numbers and birthrates, we fuck and have relationships too. The idea of spiritually bonding isn’t unknown to us, nor alien to christianity… We don’t emphasize it, but it is certainly present.