Yoga (Application) which was based on the control of the body physically and implied that a perfect control over the body and the senses led to knowledge of the ultimate reality. A detailed anatomical knowledge of the human body was necessary to the advancement of yoga and therefore those practising yoga had to keep in touch with medical knowledge. (Romila Thapar, A History of India, volume one).

I suggest : Mind and brain are two distinct things. Brain is anatomical entity whereas mind is functional entity. Mind can be defined as the function of autonomic nervous system (ANS). It is claimed that mind can be brought under conscious control through the practice of meditation. But how? ANS is largely under hypothalamic control which is situated very close to optic chiasma (sixth chakra or ajna chakra). Protracted practice of concentration to meditate at this region brings functions of ANS say mind under one’s conscious control.

ANS is further divided into parasympathetic nervous system (PSNS) and sympathetic nervous system (SNS). On the basis of these facts I have discovered a mathematical relationship for spiritual quotient (S.Q.). Spiritual Quotient can be expressed mathematically as the ratio of Parasympathetic dominance to Sympathetic dominance. PSNS dominates during meditative calm and SNS dominates during stress. In this formula we assign numerical values to the physiological parameters activated or suppressed during autonomic mobilization and put in the formula to describe the state of mind of an individual and also infer his/her level of consciousness.

Meditation is the art of looking within and science of doing nothing. We don’t use anything in meditation. We just try to concentrate to meditate at some point in human anatomy known as ‘chakra’ in Indian System of Yoga. The current of mind is flowing outward through the senses and unconsciously. The mind comes at rest gradually through regular practice of meditation. Then comes self realization and enlightenment. Protracted practice of meditation under qualified guidance will help to manage all sort of psychological problems.

Emotional Quotient can also be expressed mathematically as the product of I.Q. and Wisdom Factor. E.Q. stands for Emotional Quotient. An intelligent person may not be wise. But a wise man will always be intelligent. An intelligent person having certain level of positive emotions can be said as wise. An intelligent person lacking wisdom will turn autocrat. A wise man will always be a democrat who respects others existence.

Some may raise doubt that how could be the Wisdom quantified? The answer is simple -if Mental Age of I.Q. can be quantified then Wisdom can also be quantified, of course, comparatively with more efforts. Wilhelm Stern had given the formula of I.Q.. It is, Mental Age/ Chronological Age x 100. Spiritual Quotient (S.Q.) leverages both E.Q. and I.Q.
Radha Soami Faith is a branch of Religion of Saints like Kabir, Nanak, Paltu, Soamiji Maharaj and others. You may call It a New Wine in Old Bottle. We should not expect any miracle overnight.

In this discussion, it appears, that experts from various disciplines are participating someone of course from psychology. He /she can understand my views more clearly.

Maslow has given Hierarchy of Needs. At the top of it is need for self-actualization or self-realization.

In our society we should learn To Live and Let Live and help to satisfy others need. When the lower order needs, physiological and sociological both, are satisfied then only a person think to satisfy need for self-realization in true sense. Else he/she may spend all his/her life to satisfy at the most the for self-expression instead of self-realization.

It is, therefore, the duty of every responsible person, at the least, of our society to give serious thought over it.

For the satisfaction of need for self-realization i.e. establishment of harmony of individual consciousness with that of universal consciousness we need following three things:

1. Mater or Guru (A Self-Realized Soul)
2. Secret of Levels of Universal Consciousness
3. Method for traversing the path.

Anirudh Kumar Satsangi

Hi Anirudh,

I'm not quite sure what your comment has to do with this post, but it certainly full of assumptions and beliefs that are worth addressing and exploring.

It has so many, in fact, that I'll have to come back later and start from the top.

Actually, even though I would like to me more complete, I *will* start at the top and get the ball rolling. Maybe others will chime in about the rest.

You say, a perfect control over the body and the senses led to knowledge of the ultimate reality.

"Ultimate reality" is a meaningless statement. It *sounds* cool, and sounds like something that someone would want to experience and know, which is why it's such a compelling bit of salesmanship, as in: "Ah, but if you follow my teachings, you'll know the ultimate reality."

I mean, who WOULDN'T want to know the ultimate reality? Our mind is always looking for an answer, so if you suggest that you can give it the ULTIMATE answer, it becomes entranced and will often do whatever the teacher says is the path to this realization.

So, would you care to say more about what "ultimate reality" means?

Typically, it's not about "reality" but about an experience or a belief or a concept.

Then you say, those practising yoga had to keep in touch with medical knowledge.

The "medical knowledge" of that time (and anatomical) was SO far from what we consider complete as to be laughable. That they kept up with medieval concepts is like saying "I'm up on the latest in phrenology and blood letting." It doesn't matter if they we're keeping in touch with something that wasn't true.

Here's a related aside. In 1974, through the practice of biofeedback, I was able to develop the ability to control the temperature in specific parts of my body. I noticed that various mental images about the structure of my body would accompany the process I would engage in while I made these temperature changes.

The images have absolutely nothing to do with anatomy. They're factually wrong.

Now it would be easy to say that I was "seeing energy" or "meridians" or "nadis" or any other THEORETICAL concept. But the fact that one can make up a theory to match an experience doesn't make the theory a description of reality.

Anyone else want to tackle the next paragraph?

(And let me say, Anirudh, my interest in addressing your comment is not to tear it down, but to highlight the type of rhetoric and logic it reveals… what you've said couldn't be more familiar, and most people simply nod their head at it, or dismiss it, but rarely look carefully NOT at the content, but at the method by which the content is asserted and substantiated.)

I'll take a shot at the 'mind and brain are two distinct things'
The distinction is in the language. Using two different labels does not make two different entities. Thinking of brain as an anatomical entity and mind as a functional entity may help us in drawing an imaginary and theoretical schematic map but it does not come close to the intertwined complexity of the living, breathing human. And as Korzybski pointed out in 1933, the map is not the territory.

If my brain (or even complete autonomic nervous system)were removed from my body, would my mind still be in evidence?
What exactly does Anirudh mean by 'mind'?

I'd like to add a personal anecdote on 'ultimate reality' also. For many years I looked for this in the form of the 'voidless void' and for a while thought I'd found it.
And very nice it is too to rest in for a bit of peace and a smug feeling that the work is over.
But then I remembered how I had been able to produce mystic visions following a period of putting the brain/mind under stress and realised that the wondrous void was just another example of this weird and ultimately unknowable brain/mind producing what was requested of it.

Dang, and I was so counting on my knowledge and practice and awareness preventing me from fooling myself again. It really is turtles all the way down.

Re salesmanship and religion: I eventually decided that I had sold myself the idea of 'ultimate reality' so successfully that it was inevitable that it would turn up.

Which led me to consider the entire salesmanship subject. I sell myself every day on the idea of getting out of bed, which clothes to put on etc. Every notion I've ever had has first been sold me and I have essentially then sold it to myself, more or less successfully.
I quite enjoy being sold to, particularly if it's an unusual sales technique. Derren Brown has some goodies.

A good understanding of ideomotor action will go a long way to explaining how we can be fooled and fool ourselves, which has a bearing on the continuing unreliability of conclusions drawn from thought processes or 'knowing'–there's a good article on this on Quackwatch.
http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/ideomotor.html

For myself, I prefer Kurt Vonnegut's perceptive take in his short novella 'Cat's Cradle'. This is one of the oldest games known to man. For thousands of years adults have been showing it to children with a piece of knotted string–and for thousands of years it has annoyed and frustrated children because "there is no d*mn cat and no d*mn cradle."

"To be is to do." –Socrates
"To do is to be." –Jean-Paul Sartre
"Do be do be do." –Frank Sinatra

Yo, Anirudh … Namaste … and with all loving kindness …

"You think too much, Boss."
–Anthony Quinn, Zorba the Greek

"For the satisfaction of the need for self-realization, i.e. the establishment of harmony of individual consciousness with that of universal consciousness …"

1. Nothing is needed.
2. Nothing is required.
3. It's already a done deal.

It's already achieved, and we are it — or rather, it is us. We just don't know it (but it does : )

Thou art that.
You are it.
It is you.
I am.
IAM.

Or as Christ said on the cross, "It is accomplished!"

He was misunderstood by disciples (who often misunderstand : ) to mean that Christ's unification with THE ONE (Lord God) had been accomplished as a result of his literal sacrifice/crucifixion/blah-blah-blah. ("All religions are true, but none are literal." –Joseph Campbell)

But what TheChrist/TheBuddha/TheMessiah really understood/meant was that we are born complete — or rather, our Conscious Awareness Is.

The universe ALREADY-IS a unified, complete, infinite, eternal, enlightened, self-realized, self-sustaining, totality continuum — and the continuity of our consciousness, itself, IS the very quintessence of that continuum — or rather, we are its.

Always has been.
Always will be.
"The already and always transparent and complete." –SS

"We have arrived.
We are home.
Please enjoy your being(ness)."
–The All

"The world is like a ride in an amusement park. And when you choose to go on it you think it's real because that's how powerful our minds are. And the ride goes up and down and round and round. It has thrills and chills and it's very brightly colored and it's very loud and it's fun, for a while. Some people have been on the ride for a long time and they begin to question: 'Hey, is this real, or is this just a ride?' And other people have remembered, and they come back to us, and they say, 'Hey, don't worry, don't be afraid, ever, because this is just a ride.' And we kill those people." –Bill Hicks

Bill Hicks. Perhaps one of the most underrated of the spiritual teachers.

well, i was just reading some article and suddenly i saw yours.Well as my self being a stupid man with not much words like you ,i might have not much to say but i want to say that Tibetan buddhist never promise enlightenment in one life but argue to practice sincerely many life times with no expectation .No matter how long it take.It also says that teaching does have a potentIal to achieve enlightenment in one life time but it depends on the individual's practise and effort.
take care,don't judge other and create bad karma but look at your own mind and thought,
love

Thanks Suvajra, but, in fact, Tibetan Buddhism *does* say that the difference between it and what it calls the "lesser" schools is that:

a) You can achieve the Big-E in one lifetime
b) You're doing it for better reasons, namely, for the sake of all sentient beings instead of "just yourself" (which is an odd argument since one of the realizations is that there is no inherent self — and, therefore, other — so it's not really possible to do something for "just yourself")
c) You will have purified all aspects of your being and, therefore, achieve a more "complete" form of enlightenment (this relates to the argument that while anyone who "awakens" has the same realization as the Buddha, they are still not the buddha when they get there).

Not only that, according to some, there are those who are born enlightened. Typically, they have no need to inquire into these things. Why would they? It would be seen as a total waste of time. And then some …

I am sorry for responding so late.

Brain is anatomical entity with unlimited potential. It is unlimited like our entire universe.

Mind is functional entity. Mind has its limits.