I wonder whether there is nothing at all derived from the body that has any meaning. Take suffering. Is it perhaps through my own corporeal experience of suffering that I can identify its wrongness - and then feel sympathy for others in pain? If so, the body might provide a better perspective on good and evil than the mind. The mind, you write, is "uncaring and insensitive." In that case, perhaps the correct moral insights require the body as much as they require the mind - or even more.
Or is this what the author means by the final peace that can be achieved between mind and body?
"Weaken the mind-body connection, even sever it! When you experience a sensation, remind yourself that it means nothing."
It is important to distinguish sensation within the modality of self-centered homeostasis (self-other, with the self being the intellect and other being the body) and sensation within the modality of interpersonal dialogue (with the self being the individual, and the other being the counterparty in dialogue). There are several routes to achieve connection with the "infinite other" and thereby transcend physicality, living on an endless plain of intellect. The most common one we experience is the self-other connection of interpersonal communication. Much like the mitzvah of tzitzis, with the kavana of the t'cheiles-kisei hakava meditation, through connection with others, we can engage in a relational experience with the infinite other itself through recognition of the chelek hashem expressed through others. It is this communion (in our caste of "m'daber") that sets us apart from the universe and allows us to experience the divine connection. Recognition of the other is an unnatural and highly intellectual pursuit, but it also sets us apart through Dibbur. Through the empowerment of the self (b'shvili nivra), we gain a clearer sense of our self and our ability to make conscious choices of how we want to engage in the dialogue with the other. Once we attain clarity, we enter into a state of empathy by becoming more open to others in recognition of their unique self. Recognition of others must be based on empowerment in that communicants must be confident in their freedom to make decisions regarding the course of the dialogue. Communication between the self and the self creates agency and empowerment, and communication between the self and the other- creating empathy and recognition, requires a strong mind-body connection. In interpersonal dialogue (Dibbur), the body and the mind think and communicate together. This goes beyond physical gestures and using the mouth to articulate sounds. Neuroscience points to "mirror neurons" in the prefrontal area of the brain as the foundation for our capacity to achieve empathy by feeling what the other feels. Although the extent of their importance within the context of language processing and empathy is debated in scientific research, it is a fact that dialogue and empathic capacity is limited in the absence of these neurons. More importantly, while engaging in dialogue, one must integrate his and the "other"s emotion and physicological response within the interpersonal dialogue itself. Dibbur is as much a physiological dialogue as it is a verbal dialogue. Dvarim shebileiv are not dvarim until they exist in expression. To properly recognize self, achieve empowerment, and recognize other, one must incorporate the body's cues and physiological response into its empathic vocabulary. If one were to live an isolated existence, comprised only of self and an infinite other, then one can benefit from severing sensation from meaning. But when one lives in a continuous dialogue with others, the sensation can be communication from the infinite other itself. Some feelings are too valuable to be lost in pursuit of the relationship we think we are achieving by ignoring it.
It is interesting that you used the example of eating, as doctors and researchers are currently studying and discovering strong links between the gut and the mind.
Very interesting reflections, as usual.
I wonder whether there is nothing at all derived from the body that has any meaning. Take suffering. Is it perhaps through my own corporeal experience of suffering that I can identify its wrongness - and then feel sympathy for others in pain? If so, the body might provide a better perspective on good and evil than the mind. The mind, you write, is "uncaring and insensitive." In that case, perhaps the correct moral insights require the body as much as they require the mind - or even more.
Or is this what the author means by the final peace that can be achieved between mind and body?
"Weaken the mind-body connection, even sever it! When you experience a sensation, remind yourself that it means nothing."
It is important to distinguish sensation within the modality of self-centered homeostasis (self-other, with the self being the intellect and other being the body) and sensation within the modality of interpersonal dialogue (with the self being the individual, and the other being the counterparty in dialogue). There are several routes to achieve connection with the "infinite other" and thereby transcend physicality, living on an endless plain of intellect. The most common one we experience is the self-other connection of interpersonal communication. Much like the mitzvah of tzitzis, with the kavana of the t'cheiles-kisei hakava meditation, through connection with others, we can engage in a relational experience with the infinite other itself through recognition of the chelek hashem expressed through others. It is this communion (in our caste of "m'daber") that sets us apart from the universe and allows us to experience the divine connection. Recognition of the other is an unnatural and highly intellectual pursuit, but it also sets us apart through Dibbur. Through the empowerment of the self (b'shvili nivra), we gain a clearer sense of our self and our ability to make conscious choices of how we want to engage in the dialogue with the other. Once we attain clarity, we enter into a state of empathy by becoming more open to others in recognition of their unique self. Recognition of others must be based on empowerment in that communicants must be confident in their freedom to make decisions regarding the course of the dialogue. Communication between the self and the self creates agency and empowerment, and communication between the self and the other- creating empathy and recognition, requires a strong mind-body connection. In interpersonal dialogue (Dibbur), the body and the mind think and communicate together. This goes beyond physical gestures and using the mouth to articulate sounds. Neuroscience points to "mirror neurons" in the prefrontal area of the brain as the foundation for our capacity to achieve empathy by feeling what the other feels. Although the extent of their importance within the context of language processing and empathy is debated in scientific research, it is a fact that dialogue and empathic capacity is limited in the absence of these neurons. More importantly, while engaging in dialogue, one must integrate his and the "other"s emotion and physicological response within the interpersonal dialogue itself. Dibbur is as much a physiological dialogue as it is a verbal dialogue. Dvarim shebileiv are not dvarim until they exist in expression. To properly recognize self, achieve empowerment, and recognize other, one must incorporate the body's cues and physiological response into its empathic vocabulary. If one were to live an isolated existence, comprised only of self and an infinite other, then one can benefit from severing sensation from meaning. But when one lives in a continuous dialogue with others, the sensation can be communication from the infinite other itself. Some feelings are too valuable to be lost in pursuit of the relationship we think we are achieving by ignoring it.
It is interesting that you used the example of eating, as doctors and researchers are currently studying and discovering strong links between the gut and the mind.
Surgically incisive, grounded in advice towards implementation! Wonderful!