DISEASE - CURE- EPILOGUE (Cure Your Self - 10)

The Real and Perfect Cure 

All that precedes this chapter - which rounds up our discussions from various angles - goes to prove:

We are nothing short of most ignoble cowards, cowards to the core, if on disease inflicting punishment on us, we still plead 'Not guilty'. The general tenor of the talk of almost all patients runs on these lines: "Personally I am completely innocent. I have indeed done nothing at all. The bacteria are responsible for the disease I am suffering from - and it is the doctor's responsibility to cure me."

But a moment's reflection on the part of any patient who offers this fine piece of logic and incidentally tries to exonerate himself from a personal guilt, will immediately convince him of the amazing potential capacity he possesses for self-deception. It is one thing if a weak-willed individual were to say:

"Yes, it is true I understand and appreciate the teachings of Recipropathy. I accept them, persuaded as I am of their intrinsic value and truth. But imbibing the principles to the extent of being able to put them into immediate practice is far too difficult for me. It is a goal I wish to reach. But, then, it can be done, so far as I am concerned, a bit slowly. Please give me time. Nevertheless, I shall march towards the goal slowly, and I shall start right away - today." 

This is quite understandable and one can even sympathize with a poor patient of this type. But it is an altogether different thing when one does not accept the truth of the contentions of laws of Nature.

In one sense science and philosophy meet here. 

The primary medical inquiry, by any test, is - or at any rate should be - to know the root cause of pain or of disease.

Huxley has pin-pointed these ideas by the most adequate choice from the teachings of Buddhist philosophy. "The elements which make up man produce a capacity for pain. The cause of pain is the craving for individual life. Deliverance from craving does away with pain. The way of deliverance is the Eightfold Path."

If one suffers from a disease, and still wants to explain away things, to find out unwarrantable excuses and insist that the cause of the disease lies outside him, then, let us face facts and put the thing bluntly: it is his funeral in every sense.

Einstein says: "The true value of a human being is determined primarily by the measure and the sense in which he has attained to liberation from the self." Einstein has also conceded that "the grand aim of science is to cover the greatest number of empirical facts by logical deductions from the smallest number of hypotheses or axioms."

Yet Recipropathy hardly chooses to take advantage of the liberty Einstein has permitted it to take. For in considering the means and ends of effecting a cure, Recipropathy proves its hypothesis that there specifically exists a causal link between emotion and disease. And if there are some difficulties in actually observing the intermediate phenomena between emotion and disease that constitutes a limitation from which science itself suffers.

As it stands today, medical science labors under the handicap of a number of gaps. As has been convincingly brought out, Homeopathy and Allopathy are based on principles directly contradictory to each other. One is founded on principle of similarities, the other on the principle of opposites. Yet no government has thought of rejecting either of them. No government has reflected, nay even thought, about this glaring contradiction. To allow equal and legitimate status to two completely contradictory systems simultaneously is on par with establishing two governments in one state, one of bourgeois capitalists and the other which swears by the communist creed, and allowing people to abide by laws they feel like obeying. No government has ever thought that when two principles stand poles apart - indeed, are diagonally opposite - one alone must be true and that to give recognition to both of them is allowing people to die at least because of one of them. It is certainly high time that governments and people see through the great absurd contradiction.

In another volume of this series "New Way" it has already been argued how all schools of medicine have failed to deliver and are unable to deliver goods.

As adequately brought out on page 84 of Death of Disease, it will take centuries to discover all drugs. Neither the writer nor the readers will be alive to corroborate this promise on the part of present day medical science. As Pisavzhevsky observes, "Every discovery raises new problems." Besides, as matters stand today, theoretically it sounds absurd that science will one day discover drugs for all diseases. For there can possibly be only four categories of medical experts.

(1) Those who believe in God. Of this category, one has to say this. If an expert believes in God, he must find out the probable reason which made God inflict that agony. Then straight way it leads him to our own conclusion.

(2) Those who swear by the Marxist dogma. Now if the expert is a Marxist, then he must concede, as did Engels, that man can never master Nature. Hence no hope exists of knowledge of Nature nor of discovering cures. In this case, too, causality and laws of science lead us to the conclusion which we have set forth. (Other aspects of the problem which touch both Marxist philosophy and Recipropathy are discussed elsewhere separately).

(3) The third category is made up of non-Marxist experts. As an expert in a branch of science, he necessarily has to accept causality. If one relies on law of probability or principles of indeterminacy, one meets a comprehensive answer in our other title 'Science gives Cause'. For the purpose of this work, these laws are no obstructions in as much as, in Chapter ten we have established causal relation at least for purpose of disease-cure. In the meantime medical experts will do well to read the excellent expositions by Dr. Anthony Fidler, M.D., in Whither Medicine as to how medical experts are bound to causality because of their own tenets. The learned doctor himself suggests 'probability medicine', which we improve upon. For our present purpose Dr. Fidler's argument is sound enough to clarify how the 'causal laws' are unreservedly accepted by present medical leaders. Dr. Howard W. Huggard, M.D., the well-known medical authority admits that "in body nearly every action involves reaction." Why the word 'nearly' is unexplained, is inexplicable. In any case, then, our premises in Chapters 7, 8, 9 are firmly established - unless the doctor disproves the concept of causality.

(4) The fourth is a group difficult to be labeled as experts, but they do form a group. Members, if any, in this group believe in chaos. This group merits ignoring - for they obviously can claim no authority on behalf of medical science which firmly claims prevalence of order and existence of laws.

How does it all add up? By no logic, arguments, and school of thought can Recipropathy be radically challenged. From immemorial days, Recipropathy is the torch of truth held high and kept burning. That the truth embodied in present day Recipropathy marched under a different banner does not alter the basic conclusion of the science of Recipropathy being ancient wisdom as well as knowledge. For what is there in a name? America certainly existed before western colonizer christened the continent. All torch-bearers of truth and causality were Recipropaths - under a different name, or no name at all except servants of God and seekers of salvation.

The philosophy of Recipropathy is a philosophy of life and therefore all-pervading. 

Hence it is applicable to the field of human disease. There is extant no school as such for teaching of Recipropathy for Truth is not to be taught. For a group or all of Recipropaths there is neither a Guru nor hierarchy of office bearers. Could anyone tolerate the idea of Truth being at the mercy of red-tape administration? The flame of light that guided the world from eternity inspired me to speak the Truth. This will help it to echo from soul to soul and inspire the lighting of more flames.

Not that I am unconscious of the possibility, in spite of all the efforts on my part to clarify every issue involved, that some would never-the-less label it a mere philosophy. For such readers, just a reminder.

Please forget not that throughout the evolutionary period of knowledge, the historical past, philosophy has been invariably ahead of science. It was a philosopher, Descartes - the famous author of Discourse on Method, who propounded 'indestructibility of motion', a concept accepted later by science. It is worth-while recalling Engels' comment on this: "So here again the philosopher has been confirmed by the natural scientist after 200 years." Very few discoveries have been arrived at as the consequence of strict premeditated experimentation and objective observation. Max Planck, the founder of twentieth century physics, has remarked: "The pure rationalist has no place here."

We have certainly not transgressed, in any manner whatsoever, the limit allowed by Planck. Recipropathy provides an excellent frame-work. Details can be allowably replaced or altered by medical science. But let no one lose sight of the results, positive results brought about by Recipropathy. Experience, again and again, shows that Recipropathy is the only method which relieves the patient of his disease in the real sense. It radically, scientifically drives home the fact that health protection lies in supposing that desire for ease is disease, while real cure is the process of disease. The revelation takes away all pangs of organic pain and disorders like a miracle. 

Any patient who wishes to gain this experience will find our doors always open to his inquiry.

(Excerpts from Cure Yourself, Author - Swami Vijnananand, concluded.)

Vijay R. Joshi.

DISEASE - CURE (Cure without Medicine - 6)

Three Objections Scientists May Raise

(Excerpts from book “Cure without Medicine”)

The possible objections from those who believe in classical school of science could be as follows:

A)  Is it sound to postulate (claim) that the mind or emotions obey the law of mechanics?

B)  Do Laws of Mechanics apply to living bodies?

C)  Can the disease be termed ‘Potential Energy’ stored by the body in the strict scientific sense?

Q A – Is it sound to postulate that mind or emotions obey the laws of mechanics?

A.1 For those scientists who consider mind or emotions to be the forms of matter, no explanation is required because all of them believe that ‘matter’ will follow the laws of mechanics.

The possible objection by some scientist could be as follows:

Mind and emotions, though matter, do not obey the laws of mechanics as they are sub-atomic entities (At sub-atomic level, i.e. at quantum mechanics, the laws of mechanics are not seen to be followed clearly or evidently).

It is a fact that some scientists hold ‘causality’ to have no sway in the sub-atomic realm (i.e. sub-atomic particles also follow causality). More information on this is available in the ‘Purpose of the Universe’, written by S.V.

Scientist like Max Planck and Einstein consider that as the science would advance in knowledge the ignorance about the behavior properties of matter at sub-atomic level would be vanished. They decidedly hold that causal laws are true everywhere and in due course, with progress in all directions, these will be proved to hold good at sub-atomic level as well.

Under these circumstances, particularly after the equivalence of mass and energy has been established, no scientist could be dogmatic and say that laws of motion should not apply to the mind or to emotions. Later it will be seen how the controversy on ‘causality’ is resolved. For the moment let us concentrate on how ‘ease and disease can be measured scientifically’.

A.2 Science cannot afford to keep itself away from the discussion of ‘the effect brought about by the mind’. Because as a science it has to do its duty to deal with this question of highest importance to entire mankind. If it wants, science can neglect ‘mind’ but the ‘effect of mind’ cannot be at all ignored by science. Because though the ‘mind’ is outside the realm of fundamental science, its effect decidedly lie within it (science). As discussed later, it falls entirely within the scope of science to deal with the ‘effect’ created by mind.

A.3 Emotions (say anger) arouse a person and then he performs some action on other person. If the action on the other person is to be measured then the causes to be considered should obviously include the emotions (in mind) which incited the action (This is illustrated by proper example on page 80-81 of the book).

A.4 Now we came to the focal point of the subject of this book.

When an individual is ‘angry’ he need not necessarily move and initiate some visible action. Even he is sitting quite on a place, unmoved, the pulse pushes itself forward. So does the heart. Millions of molecular in the body are set in motion. The inertia of the body is disturbed. It is nothing but a mechanical motion in energy sense.

A.5  Science difficulty could be as follows:

Even it is accepted that the emotions (in mind) produces action in the mechanical sense, how can we measure emotions (?) (What could be the unit for emotion say, ‘anger’?)

This difficulty though genuine, has to be sorted out and that is business of science. If we accept ‘emotion’ to be force, the question is how to measure force!

Measurement of force. Challenge to science

Science would be denying itself the title of ‘science’, were it to declare and say that emotions as cause do not fall within the purview of science. If this is outside the purview of scientist as they consider it today (this book was written by S.V. before 1960), then the clear unambiguous duty of science to get it within its purview. They as scientists cannot escape the responsibility, once they have laid down definitions and when a situation arises that fulfills the required condition.

Still there may be another difficulty which science may raise. For any mechanical action, a minimum of two bodies are required. But mind and body belong to one individual only.

Let it be categorically stated that not all scientist consider mind and body to be one, although they certainly belong to one individual. We have seen the quotation from Sherrington in Chapter nine. It says that even a single cell in unique entity, different from other entities. There are millions of cells in the body. If they obey the law of individuality (which this question presupposes), there will be no disease but by and large, they strive to obey their own individuality. (More discussion on this in the book ‘Mind Power’ written by S.V.).

This leads to the conclusion that in a single individual there are millions of entities. So let us restrict ourselves to accept at least the mind body as a duality.

A.6 We see no reason at all why the ‘mind’ should not be considered as a separate body. This contention (statement) is supported by ample convincing and exhaustive scientific evidence available in other books by S.V. namely ‘What Mind Means’, and Appendix to ‘Science and Philosophy’. Legitimately, we cannot speak of a cause-effect relationship without first accepting the mind-body duality in this reference.

Question B – Do laws of mechanics apply to living bodies?

B.1 Answer: Careful scrutiny of our detailed answer to question ‘A’ answer this question to some extent.

B.2 There will have to be three different answers for three different groups of scientists.

Group I – Scientists who do not reject or disapprove causality (or those scientists who accept causality). None of these group can show that what we have established in the immediately preceding paragraphs is not in strict conformity with causality.

Group II – Scientists who accept mind to be matter and causality as the absolute and supremely reigning (ruling or controlling) scientific law, then they can never reject applicability of the laws of motion to the mind.

Group III – This belongs to materialists, Non-Marxist scientists, who do not accept causality. They may argue that mind being at sub-atomic level like electrons, it is not governed by laws of mechanics. If they would argue mind to be the produce of brain at the atomic level, then they do admit laws of motion, while considering the causal relationship between mind and body (i.e. brain). On the other hand, if they consider the mind to be the produce of the brain at sub-atomic level, and consequently subject to the principle on indeterminacy, they are utterly astray (wrong).

Because here the answer is fully determinate, (definite, certain) when we know that the emotions as the cause of pulse variation (PV). The proofs establish the causal sequence beyond a shadow of doubt. Hence the conclusion where mind is concerned, action cannot be termed indeterminate. (Readers who are interested in full information on this point may refer another books by S.V. viz. ‘What Mind Means’ along with ‘Purpose of the Universe’ and ‘Science and Philosophy’).

To conclude we may say –

-         While the individual opinions of scientists may differ from group to group.

-         Or for that matter from individual to individual.

-         The configuration of mind and emotions each scientist may have his own personal opinion.

In spite of all these facts, science as such, must consider motion (or effect) produced by mind with its domain (Kingdom, area of activity). Looking at (or measuring) the visible mechanical effect actually produced, science can (work backward to) measure mind and assign the cause of these (effects) to be mind.

B.3 Summary –

Emotion does come under the realm of physics, at least when, it makes mark on material body. Any doubt regarding this has no place in science.

Fundamental Definitions

- We have established that Pulse Variation (PV) is motion as per laws of mechanics

-         This PV is produced by emotion.

-         When this motion caused by emotion reaches a stage, a turning point is reached, a new state is arrived at.

-         We term that state as disease

-         Disease is essentially a complexity accumulated state of emotion or an exaggerated state of emotions reflected on the body.

-         We do not understand the direct link or links between emotion and so-called disease because the process is very complicated. Particularly because the body has a capacity to store the reaction potential for some time.

-         Since the duel between action and reaction is between emotions and body, therefore, the potential energy at the time of action can be directed at emotions only. (The example of steel wire turning into spring and later rewinding after reaching the limit is given earlier).

-         One can imagine how the complicated the process would be.

-         When an individual reflects that no less than at least six emotions (Shadvikar), blended in an infinity of ways have to be accounted for.

In any case, the readers who have carefully studied will have no difficulty in following our interpretation of the inter-relation of body-mind and the causal connection between emotions and disease.

We accept and firmly hold by the dual conception of the mind and body.

Question C: Can the disease be termed ‘Potential Energy’ stored by the body in the strict scientific sense?

In the discourse about disease it should be held that the two bodies where in this interplay of action and reaction goes on are the body on the one hand and the emotional personality (or the force created by emotion-mind) on the other. Action and reaction takes place between these two bodies.

-         The causal body (emotion personality) gives the other body (physical body) a motion. This energy in part of whole can be kept potent.

-         This potential energy at its appropriate chosen time can become the cause of another action (reaction). And this reaction we term as disease.

For our purpose, it is sufficient to establish three conditions –

i) Emotions and the mind should be presumed to obey the laws of mechanics

ii) Laws of Mechanics do apply to living bodies

iii) Disease can be called potential energy in the light of our detailed analytical discussion.

Further research necessary.

Research on the exact measurement of motion in pulse and other parts of the body in the case of each disease can and should be undertaken by science.

Open mind for new thoughts

It should be abundantly clear that only those scientists could be rightly termed non-dogmatic who care to look at and have inclination to appreciate new hypothesis. If there is any obstruction in this due to the closed circle approach, then such scientists should realize that their own concept of science needs very drastic revision. They should consider and understand the new hypothesis, if they find that logically the new hypothesis could constitute a justifiable explanation.

Can we compare disease and potential energy?  Yes, we can! According to several authorities in science.

(To be continued .. )

Vijay R. Joshi.

DIS-EASE AND CURE

Swami Vijnananand (S. V.) had said:

“It is the non-matter that matters most”!

In the blogs to follow, we shall see the views expressed by S. V. on the “Cure of Human Disease”.

He has dealt the vital aspect of disease cure emphasizing the role of mind in a unique way. Besides other references, the books given below cover these views.

Death of Disease.Cure without Medicine.Cure Yourself.

These views were published in 1960s, which was before about 50 years, no due cognition was taken then. Now in the 1st/2nd decade of 21^st century, the science thinkers seem to appreciate the role of mind in the health treatment.

Science has to take cognition of MIND (Which is non-matter).

In his book “SPONTANEOUS EVOLUTION” Bruce Lipton says that the conventional science for its own courageous quest for the Truth has to disapprove its dogma which says “matter only matters”.

What really matters? To quote Einstein: The field is the only reality. The field is the other name of cosmic energy, energy filled in the Universe. The energy which enables the human life is also a part of the field. This energy is usually called soul energy or mind.

Bruce Lipton elaborates the benefits achieved by acceptance of MIND by science as follows:

1.    Once for all we can end the useless arguments between science and religion.

2.    By acknowledging the power of invisible fields, we open-up an entirely new field of enquiry and challenge science to explore what it has previously ignored.

3.    We can realize that humanity is operating on unified field of dreams and we can rejoice that the field is a playing field  not a battle field.

"Mind over Medicine". A recent book by Lissa Rankin, M.D.

Lissa explains, our minds can make us sick and they can make us well. Our feelings and beliefs impact our every cell. How we speak to ourselves matters. Whether or not we feel and express love affects our well-being. That very notion empowers me. It fills me with hope and curiosity. She explains, using some of the latest scientific research.

With this insightful book, Dr. Lissa Rankin reintroduces us to a spring of ancient intelligence that shows the power you have over your own health. She carries the torch passed down to her by some of the greatest mind-body healers of our time. Folks like Bernie Seigel, Dean Ornish, Deepak Chopra, Candace Pert, Jon Kabat-Zinn, and count- less other pioneers before her. Quite simply, Lissa is the leading voice of the next generation of medical trailblazers and innovators who marry hard evidence with heart.

With this review of latest Research the Mind- Brain relationship, the conventional science also is seen taking new mode accepting the mind’s role in directing brain.

Volunteering Reduces Risk of Hypertension in Older Adults

June 13, 2013 — It turns out that helping others can also help you protect yourself from high blood pressure. New research from Carnegie Mellon University shows that older adults who volunteer for at least 200 hours per year decrease their risk of hypertension, or high blood pressure, by 40 percent. The study, published by the American Psychological Association's Psychology and Aging journal, suggests that volunteer work may be an effective non-pharmaceutical option to help prevent the condition. Hypertension affects an estimated 65 million Americans and is a major contributor to cardiovascular disease, the leading cause of death in the U.S. (Ref. Science News)

Humans Are Happier When They Do the Right Thing; It Also Helps Them Overcome Difficulties

June 12, 2013 — Communities that stick together and do good for others cope better with crises and are happier for it, according to a new study by John Helliwell, from the University of British Columbia in Canada, and colleagues. Their work suggests that part of the reason for this greater resilience is the fact that humans are more than simply social beings, they are so-called 'pro-social' beings. In other words, they get happiness not just from doing things with others, but from doing things both with and for others. The paper is published online in Springer's Journal of Happiness Studies.. . (Ref. Science News)

Brain Can Be Trained in Compassion, Study Shows

May 22, 2013 — So far, little was scientifically known about the human potential to cultivate compassion -- the emotional state of caring for people who are suffering in a way that motivates altruistic behavior. A new study by researchers at the Center for Investigating Healthy Minds at the Waisman Center of the University of Wisconsin-Madison shows that adults can be trained to be more compassionate. The report, published Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science, investigates whether training adults in compassion can result in greater altruistic behavior and related changes in neural systems underlying compassion. (Ref. Science News)

The role of mind training

Dr. Richard Davidson is a leading scientist in the field of brain plasticity and has demonstrated that by intervention of proper nurturing strategies at home, school and other effective media in the child environment and by imparting the training of contemporary practices; the skills of emotional intelligence can be effectively imparted. He is one of the leading scientists working for this cause on the platform of Mind and Life Institute. In one of his presentations (Google lecture 2009) the future role of MIND training is elaborated in his vision as follows: -

By year 2050

1.  Mental exercise will be accepted and practiced in the same way as physical exercise.

2.    We will have science of virtual qualities.

3.    We will incorporate mind back into medicine and better understand how brain can modulate peripheral biology. Biology in the way; that affects health.

4.    We will develop a secular approach to provide method and practice for contemplative traditions to :

5.    Teach teachers and children ways to better regulate emotions and attention and cultivate qualities like kindness and compassion.

6.    Transform corrections so that forgiveness can be cultivated in victims and emotion regulation and stress reduction in offenders.

7.    Increase awareness of our interdependence upon others and upon the planet and be more responsible care takers of our precious environment.

8.    Promote their wider spread adaptation into the major institutes of our culture. This will help to restore civility, humility, gratitude and other virtues in our culture.

The book “Train your Mind change your Brain” (Sharon Begley) is a detailed account of many aspects in this area. The maternal state of mind during prenatal stages plays a pivotal role whereas paternal care, too, matters. The spirit of three years, lives with us until 100 years, they say. Hence, prenatal and early childhood years can really shape our mind.

We shall see in details the treatment given by S. V. to this vital issue in the blogs to follow.

Vijay R. Joshi.

Desire to exist is the the basis for the origin, MIND POWER - 1

(Excerpts from book: MIND POWER (1980) CH 1 TO 6, Author - Swami Vijnananand (S.V.), Manashakti publication)

1. PREAMBLE.

Those readers who are not sure about the existence of mind, independent of matter and those who resist the idea of life after death, may refer to the books “What Mind Means' and  'Know your death” written by S.V. (The earlier  Blogs on 'What Mind Means' may also be seen). While the book (MIND POWER) deals with many diverse basic subjects of interest, one of the main purposes is to promote understanding about the role of multi-minds in the multi-cellular organism. With this understanding the reader will be able to find answers to the questions about his own mind power, which is of prime concern to him for the success and happiness in the life. The proposition of multi minds is not easy to digest. Even Swami Vijnananand (S.V.) also experienced this initially. Truth, when one understands at its turning point, at each Phase, remains stranger than fiction.

1.1  Life.

Answer to the question- ‘what is life’ still eludes us at all levels of biological organizations from nucleoprotein to level represented by virus to the level of human organism we face the impossibility of drawing a rigid boundary between life and life less. Instead of using immutable (unchangeable) qualitative category, we have a series of gradations imperceptibly (that cannot be perceived) approaching a certain boundary that cannot be truly fixed. Hence a possibility of giving a faultless answers to a question ‘what is life ‘still eludes us.

We have not found definite evidence of bio-matter equivalence. This cannot be understood by only physical, materialistic study/approach.

1.2              Free will – Acrobats of mind.

Whether the first free will is to be attributed to electron, nucleus or something else are the alternatives available. As it may be the fact that it is only a ‘reflect effect’ observed at the level of electron but concealing in a portion of nucleus or Para- nucleus state. The free will at any stage of the hierarchy is the acrobats of the mind.

1.3              Reference to the evidence of mind.

S.V. has defined mind as ‘non-matter’, or a thing which transcends the velocity of light. He has elaborately discussed this ‘non-matter’ in terms of scientific terms in his other books. On the theory of velocity of light the above books substantiate negative proof that’ non-matter ‘does exist. For this we designate the term ‘mind’ for common understanding. (Please refer Blogs on "What Mind Means")

1.4              Virus proceeds as well as terminally too they generate.

Virus is taken to be at the border line between life and lifeless. That means they should be the starting entity in the history of the life of the organism. But there is a controversy. Viruses multiply (grow many fold) only in living medium. That means the controversy spells whether virus is a first product of bio world or it is a last product? How can the first virus shoot off when life, in which it could multiply was not available?

From pulse to mind

a) S.V. elsewhere has demonstrated that the pulse variation of a human being can reasonably (believably) indicate the forecast of the probable development in the future. The pulse rate is linked with the brain through the cerebral cortex. Thus the mind (emotions) acts on body (i.e. pulse) through cerebral cortex. Thus this can be considered as a vocal dialogue between mind and matter (body).

b)  S.V. in his books (Equation of happiness and Cure without Medicine) has shown that laws of action and reaction are also applicable to the mind . When matter and mind enter into conversation through the language of emotions, the question springs up “at what stage emotions enter the living organism?” At this juncture, the very question of onset of life comes in, which is the link between matter and non-matter (mind).

c) Origin of life: Once it was thought that origin of the cell was beginning of life. But the inquiry demands further step back.

d) In this book we are tracing back the origin of life down to mind.

1.7 Later viruses for reciprocal revenge.

a)       If initial virus was a reality they should be assumed to be non-parasite, since there was no life to prey upon. Perhaps they may be benevolent as early progress needed it.

b)       Inequalities: With so called progress (original benevolence was replaced by) tendencies such as possessiveness, selfishness, aggression and ego might have cropped up, and so also cycle of revenge.

c)       Evolution: An animal kingdom progressed through higher ladders of cellular structure, multi cellular, complex organisms gained supremacy at the cost of those who lagged behind in the race. In turn those who suffered chose to exert their share of revenge, reducing them to micro world. (Bacteria, viruses etc.). In multi cellular organism, play of virus cell-minds mooted, their weaker cells were subjected to domination.

d)      The statements in this book may be accepted or rejected with reasons.

Denial of our bold hypothesis creates complications, so-called paradoxes,contradictions,leaps, unknown turned riddle some. This is because, the logical sequence, which is the outcome of radical thinking are being refused in the name of science by some dogmatists.

2.   SCIENCE IS OUR HIGHEST CLUE.

Though there is growing evidence about existence of non-matter provable in terms of science  (Please refer to earlier BLOG), the utility of science shall never end. If this (the hypothesis by S.V.) is understood in proper perspective, the unnecessary tussle between science and reality will be over. 

3.  INFERENCES FROM OLD AND NEW PHYSICS

(a) Why this discussion?

If one wants to understand, foresee to prevent and cure human ills, a blue print is required to be drawn. Approach for such a blue print becomes difficult unless we remove the kernels (outer covers) of matter i.e. unless we reach to the mind (non-matter) level of the human being. Laws of matter should have served adequately to meet all challenges of human life if mind reflected only material characteristics and would not have created the enigma (puzzles, riddles) in the behavior. Instead laws of matter have come in for troubles. Causality is often confronted (challenged).Inadequacy of inferences from ‘laws of matter’ are crying for solution. Right from medicine to philosophy there is a crop of new questions notwithstanding old answers.

We don’t feel that laws of matter have lost their utility. We consider that the reason is: Laws of matter account for only a reflex result of non-material existence behind scene. Our findings ascertain that inferences from old and new physics can be reconciled.

(b) Science is still the Rational Hope of a man.

Science is to be accepted for more than one reason.

1.      Science judicially declares its limitations whenever so demanded by the occasion.

2.      We are speaking about supra-physical character of matter. Many such proofs for the above are non-obtainable without using systematic steps of science.

3.      Science by all means is open minded. What is necessary is to expand its frontiers to accommodate the incoming truth without any subjective reservation.(prejudiced view)

4.      The need of practical life. (Leaving the discussion at higher level, in common life, science remains indispensable.)

5.      Open minded differences are allowed in science.

6.      There are a number of biologists who are of the opinion that it is not possible to give an account of how the amoeba came in to existence, its structure and his behavior as a living cell without going outside the laws of physics and chemistry. There are other biologists who have a fixed belief that such an account of living things will one day be given. However we have not got anywhere near being able to give an account of living things which is based completely on the laws of physics and chemistry.

4. BLUE PRINT OF ENQUIRY.

In order to understand life, (body + mind or matter + non-matter) objectively we need to consider four alternatives, which emerge as follows:-

4.1. Multi cellular animals and every connected cell is matter.

In this case the laws of matter unquestionably rule.

4.2. None of them is matter, while manifested matter (clearly seen) matter is a conceptual reality. Here the laws of matter will be at work at the “manifested conceptual material level,” while the analysis of mind will be on different level. (As done in this book)

4.3. Every cell has matter but the multi cellular animal has no matter.  This is redundant as in this case the individual animal does not exist at all.

4.4. Cell has no mind but the multi cellular animal has a mind.

4.5. The enquiry of cell (cell mind) opens new vistas of understanding. Man has to learn adjustment with his own self, (i.e. own cells). This will bring peace within, curtail a list of over aspiration (about wealth, fame etc.) and ameliorate (improve) relationship with the people with whom he lives. Indeed the further life shall be the waiting award.

5.  ORGANISING MIND TO CELL MIND.

We trail the way to the breath taking mind or the organized mind or to the so called individual mind and try to establish its relationship with the cell empire.

Hypothesis: - Organized mind, when it gets formed.

5.1 The animal’s existence in this world starts with the conception of male (father) and female (mother). Thus the organized mind, which we hypothesize, steps up through the cell twin provided by father and mother.

We then conceive various other steps.

Organized mind sets in for its selfish motives, (Desire to take birth).

Weaker, half willing, dormant cell shells (shell- the outward appearance of a person’s character) are over powered for selfish ends on both sides (i.e. from father and mother’s sides). i.e. The material part of the cells from father and mother is used by the ‘to be born child’s mind’ to get the bodily existence in the mother’s body.

  

5.2 Duplication.

Duplication of similar selfishly motivated cells from conception till birth takes place in the womb.

5.3 Defective growth.

When the “ organized mind “  fails to collect sufficient or proper (quality of) cell minds, the outcome is the birth of an imbalanced personality at physical level, psychic level or at both the levels.

5.4 Paradox of “life”

Life begins. That is living together of paradoxical interests (of the cell minds and organized mind). The process of moving in a specified direction continues secretly and quickly.

5.5 Multi-layeredness of mind.

Inherent in this theory multi-layer ness of life (minds) is obvious. That is what we see internally, externally materially and immaterially. (How and When is explained in this book and other books of S.V.)

5.6 Way out: Know. Adjust. Be justly equanimous, (Cool tempered).

6.  HYPOTHETICAL THEORY NEEDS PROOF.

For those hypothetical necessary conditions (postulates) to be reasonably proved at the theoretical level, we need evidence on the following points

.

6.1 Mind is independent of matter.(Link to What Mind Means)

6.2 “organized mind “exists in an individual.

6.3 Overlapped mind and multi-layer ness.

6.4 Paradoxical “living “together.

6.5 Our interpretation of views.

6.6 Our interpretation of relief.

The detailed description and evidence about the above requirements is given in further chapters of the book MIND POWER.

Summary:

-          The book attempts to explain in details the origin of life on the earth. DESIRE is the function of MIND. Only matter can’t desire. When ‘matter’ joined the ‘mind’, the desire of ‘existence’ of mind got fulfilled and the ‘LIFE’ originated on the earth.  

-          Though the ‘CELL’ was the first life on the earth, the logical pre-forms of life would be the COASERVATE and VIRUS.

-          Once a single cell life came in to being, the desire to exist and exist with comfort led to the formation of multi-cell lives. The same desire continues in the process of further evolution till the advanced species of human evolved.

-          Mind enters into conversation with the body through ‘emotions’. Then the next question is at what stage emotions entered into living organism? Here one reaches to the origin of life on earth which is the first link between the mind (non-matter) and the body (matter).

-          This logical hypothesis be accepted or rejected with valid reasons. The dogmatic approach of rejecting would result in creating complications in terms of so many paradoxes, unknowns and riddle-some aspects which are prevailing in the field of science.

-          The blue print to foresee and prevent the human ills cannot be drawn unless we reach the non-matter level of human being i.e. mind. We just can’t restrict to the materialistic approach. The laws of Physics and Chemistry are not adequate to understand the science of life.

-          Book MIND POWER tries to trace the journey of life from matter to the first cell and then from multi-cells to the evolution up to the advent of human being emphasizing the role played by the ‘desire’ which is the exclusive property of the ‘mind’.

(Note: This is an attempt to make reader friendly interpretation of the book “MIND POWER” based on my perception. Inquisitive readers are requested to refer to the original book to cross check their understanding.)

Vijay R. Joshi.