![\"crow\"](\"http:\/\/bodhi.name\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/01\/crow.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\nAlong with the process of evolution as we understand it, there also took place the development of the primate and human brain, as well as the activity (mechanical and psychic) was getting more complicated. The development of our brain is getting along with our psychic life becoming more complicated. New structures of the brain become the material foundation for the successful functioning and new manifestations of the personality. This is easy to understand. If I want have music in my car, nobody will be surprised to discover there a new \u201caddition\u201d in the form of a player in the nearest future.<\/p>\n
This is what is interesting. Ceasing, or as minimum, an extreme decrease of experiencing negative emotions (NEs) and cultivation of enlightened perceptions (EPs) \u2013 are new phenomena for humans. Like a smug windbag, everybody thinks every person is a whole Universe. But an elementary investigation proves that every person is far from being a Universe, every human is just a dump of various trash, a mass of typical and well predictable mechanisms. The people\u2019s way of life and what they make of themselves, permit to call them people only with very high tolerance. They are a combination of similar negative emotions (irritation, wrath, jealousy, self-pity and so on). They are a set of the same concepts (seniors should be respected, sex is shameful, homosexuality is a perversion, children must go to school and so on). They are a set of the same illnesses (apathy, dementia, heart attacks and so on). They are a set of the same uninteresting and joyless wishes (cook the dinner for the son, force the daughter to wear knickers at the beach, call the mother and so on). Mercy me, good God, where is the Universe here?<\/p>\n
Of course, all this trash can also have a really universal variety of combinations, like any ordinary dump, but who will have the heart to call a dump to be a \u201cUniverse\u201d? It\u2019s nice to flatter yourself, while consuming a mug of beer and sitting in front of the telescope. But let us leave in peace those devouring beer foam and vehemently roaring about their universal quintessence. Better ask those with common sense \u2013 do you believe indeed that your life is so rich with emotions, impressions and thoughts? Is it so rich that you can call it a \u201cUniverse\u201d?<\/p>\n
Probably, the answer will be \u2013 of course, human life is often very simple and even primitive, but it has a potential of huge possibilities.<\/p>\n
What other \u201cpossibilities\u201d and whose possibilities are we talking about? Who spends hours and days in the attempt to evoke a response from this hypothetical universe inside our being? Maybe these are your relatives? Or your friends? Or esoteric followers, throwing important phrases like \u201cone cannot explain and express it, one can only feel it\u201d. Nobody does. Nobody does, except those, who are engaged in the selection of attractive states. Generally speaking, nobody does, except me and the snouts.<\/p>\n
(Somebody will think of this word \u201csnouts\u201d as something rude, but I recommend changing the attitude towards this word. Some people curse using the words a \u201cJew\u201d, or a \u201cdog\u201d, or a \u201cpig\u201d, or a \u201cnegro\u201d. Does it mean we have to forget these words? Nothing of the kind. They can curse as much as they like, as for us, we like the word \u201csnout\u201d, it is affectionate and energetic. We use this word to call those who practice the selection of attractive states and who are accepted as such with other snouts).<\/p>\n
Selection, cultivation and experiencing of the attractive states is quite known in history, nevertheless, it is new for Humankind as a whole. Definitely, certain people \u2013 some very famous, like Ramakrishna or Vivekananda, some less famous, and probably unknown \u2013 have experienced enlightened perceptions in a significant extent. But nobody has ever created a system, capable of liberating from all types of distresses \u2013 from negative emotions, from stupidity (dominance of dogmatic concepts), from mechanical wishes, from unpleasant feelings, from dullness (absence of differentiation of perceptions). This is a system of cultivating happy wishes, pleasant feelings, common sense and enlightened perceptions. This system is created for the first time, and I am the one who has created it. I realize this phrase can cause rejection as it creates an impression of self-admiration. But if you are the first to do something, then either you have to go on a leash of your shyness and insincere humbleness, or make a direct statement \u2013 yes, I have done it, I have discovered America, I have disintegrated the atom, I have developed the selection of attractive states.<\/p>\n
This event apparently does not have any analogies in the world history, and it is not the aim to show off, but to draw attention to the fact that there are no analogies to the snouts practice. We all are discovering the new America, though the caliber of this activity is incomparable \u2013 it is as if we discover Space.<\/p>\n
Differentiation of perceptions is similar to the starting stages of Humanity development, when the primates took the stone in the hand to break a coconut. For that they had to make the act of differentiation \u2013 I, the stone, the coconut, to break and to drink. Without this differentiation, a result-oriented and successful activity would be impossible. We do the same \u2013 we differentiate the perceptions \u2013 here is a negative emotion, here is a wish to eradicate this negative emotion, here is a wish to jump into the EP, here is the EP, and here is the enlightened background (EB).<\/p>\n
This is interesting, but the process of differentiation of perceptions clashes with a very strong opposition from the philosophizing esoteric followers, like \u201cour feelings are subtle and incomprehensible, do not narrow them down to\u2026 and so on\u201d. This is an absolute bullshit of a person that does not want to change anything in his life, but wants to enjoy the admiration of silly converts, which are quite satisfied with anything \u2013 both hostility, and apathy, and dullness. Perceptions can be differentiated, though in the beginning it\u2019s not so easy. But it is interesting! As it has been mentioned before \u2013 the process of the differentiation of perceptions is creative, constructive and resonating with EPs.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
(Through all my books there is a red line of disgust I feel towards all the con-people that show off as philosophers, esoteric followers and quite often psychologists. They are the so called \u201csoul experts\u201d, meaningfully juggling meaningless words to impress as wise, knowing some profound truth, which is unavailable to ordinary people. At the same time they are incredibly dull and stupid \u2013 what else is it possible to achieve, if you do not clearly understand the meaning of words in a discussion, and your counterpart uses the same words and does not understand the meaning as well.<\/p>\n
I want to make an example, proving I am not alone in my attitude to people of this kind. Richard Feynman describes that he has been invited to a philosophical seminar. The seminar was like a lesson. They met once a week to discuss the next chapter from Whitehead\u2019s \u201cProcess and Reality\u201d. Someone was making a report on the subject and it was followed by a discussion. I went to the seminar, promising myself I would not open my mouth as I knew nothing of the subject, and I was there just a visitor.<\/p>\n
What happened at the seminar was typical \u2013 incredibly typical, but nevertheless, it was true. At first I was silent. One of the students made a report on the chapter they were supposed to learn that week. Whitehead often used the words \u201csubstantial object\u201d in that chapter. Apparently these words were used with some particularly technical meaning, which was defined earlier, but I did not understand it.<\/p>\n
After some discussion of the meaning of the expression \u201csubstantial object\u201d, the professor, who was in charge of the seminar and had the intention of explaining the main point of the subject, made a drawing on the board of something resembling lightning. \u201cWhat do you think, Mr. Feynman, – he said \u2013 is electron a \u201csubstantial object?\u201d<\/p>\n
Now I was in a situation. I admitted that I did not read the book and this is why I had no idea what Whitehead implied by this expression, I was here only as a visitor. \u201cBut, – I said \u2013 I will try and answer your question, if you first answer mine, so I can understand the meaning of the expression a \u201csubstantial object\u201d. What about a brick \u2013 is it a substantial object?\u201d<\/p>\n
My intention was to clarify whether they considered theoretical constructions as substantial objects. Electron is a theory that we use. It is so helpful for us to understand how nature functions, that we almost can call it real. Using the analogy, I wanted to clarify my idea about the theory. In case with the brick I would ask \u201cand what do you think of what is inside the brick?\u201d and then I would say that nobody has ever seen what is there inside of the brick. Any time, when a brick is broken, only the surface can be seen. What is inside the brick \u2013 is only the theory that helps to understand the nature of things. It is similar with the theory of electrons. So I started with the question \u201cIs a brick a substantial object?\u201d<\/p>\n
They started giving answers. One guy stood up and said: \u201cA brick is a separate specific object. This is exactly what Whitehead implied by the substantial object\u201d.<\/p>\n
Another guy said: \u201cNo, a separate brick is not a substantial object. The bricks common feature \u2013 their \u201cbrickness\u201d is the substantial object\u201d.<\/p>\n
The third guy said: \u201cNo, bricks cannot be substantial objects. \u201cSubstantial object\u201d is an idea in our mind that appears when we think of bricks\u201d.<\/p>\n
Then there was another student, and another, and I tell you \u2013 I have never heard so many different and peculiar opinions of a brick. And it duly finished in chaos as in all stories about philosophers. In all their previous discussions they did not bother to think whether such a simple object as a brick, saying nothing of an electron, was a \u201csubstantial object\u201d).<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The cultivation process of available pleasant perceptions brings new perceptions, and this is an amazing process, having no analogies. I can compare it only with the first orgasm. When I was about ten years old, I climbed a big old lime-tree, growing near our house. I started with a thick hanging branch \u2013 I encompassed the branch with both my arms and legs, crawled up and these manipulations caused friction against my testicles. And one beautiful day, due to these active movements, my body was penetrated with an incredibly sweet feeling. Amazed, I froze on that spot, imitating the movements to hold this feeling. And it went on and on, until my hands became weak and I slid down the branch. At home I found a better way to trigger this feeling, pressing my piger (a substitute word for the lifeless \u201cphallus\u201d from \u201cpenis\u201d and \u201ctiger\u201d) against stomach and moving the palm up and down. I discovered a more progressive method of taking the piger into the hand later \u2013 while watching pornography, which was unavailable for children at that time. A few weeks more of those exercises ended up with the explosion of enjoyment \u2013 that was the first orgasm. The orgasm became for me a real escape, like for many other teenagers with their life being in constant suppression. It became a faithful source of enjoyment and I had my orgasms from three to four times a day and every day. But with time the enjoyment faded a little, and I understood that if I wanted the same radiant enjoyment, I have to make longer intervals between orgasms.<\/p>\n
The unique advantage of EPs against orgasms consists in the fact that intervals are not required. More than that \u2013 the more frequent, radiant and deep EPs, the stronger your experiences are, the clearer your mind is and the more active and stronger your body.<\/p>\n
Snouts are doing something that has never been done before so consistently. We discover the hypothetical \u201cUniverse\u201d, which is hibernating inside of anyone, who wants to find it. Evolution of the body will follow the evolution of conscience. First of all, this evolution will take place in the brain. Roughly speaking, in the process of evolution, the reptilian complex of the brain that we have inherited from dinosaurs and that generates such signals as \u201ckill and eat\u201d, accreted the limbic system. The limbic system, inherited from animals, that generates strong emotions, accreted a huge neocortex (a new cortex), which is the basis of the human superior psychic activity, or to be more exact, what is still accepted as \u201csuperior\u201d.<\/p>\n
85% of the human brain is neocortex, which controls prime instincts and configures the material basis of psychic activity. Neocortex of the civilized humans also controls the reptilian reaction \u201cto kill and eat the enemy\u201d, and in the result people negotiate. Following this logics, it is unavoidable that the brain of a person that cultivates EPs, will develop a new structure \u2013 let us call it \u201cenlightened cortex\u201d or \u201cenlightex\u201d (please do not confuse with latex J). When the reptilian complex gives a command to \u201ckill and eat\u201d, the neocortex transforms it into \u201csit at a table of negotiations, cheat and outsmart, achieve better conditions within the morals and the law\u201d. Enlightex of those cultivating EPs, or those that at least like the idea of selecting the attractive states (SAS), will develop the final imperative for their interaction \u2013 \u201cpromote mutual prosperity and enjoyment\u201d. Such insults as \u201crusty water is in your veins, not blood\u201d will not stir up people\u2019s minds.<\/p>\n
(Of course, this is just a small joke-excursus. To get to the point, you have to remember that blood is mainly made up of water, containing lots of erythrocytes among other ingredients, and due to these erythrocytes our blood is red. Erythrocytes are red, because they contain the packed hemoglobulin, and hemoglobulin is red, because when it reacts with the air in the lungs it extracts oxygen. Still it does not explain why blood is red. The huge molecule of hemoglobulin contains an atom of iron, and this atom is responsible for seizing the atoms of oxygen, which means\u2026 it rusts quickly! Remember the colour of rust, and it will explain the origin of blood colour. Regardless of how funny it is, but there is rusty water in our veins!)<\/p>\n
The structure and the appearance of the enlightex, location, development process, interconnections with other \u201cinferior\u201d brain structures \u2013 the science of the future will give the answers to all these questions. So if you are the one who plans to be engaged with the problems of physiology and evolution of the brain \u2013 do not lose your chance to start investigations in the subject and write your name in the scrolls of history. You will need at least one snout as minimum that will give permission to scan and map the brain with the help of different tomographs, encephalographs and so on. It is quite possible that even the primitive investigations will bring unexpected results. Taking an encephalogram of a person generating EPs one after another is not a complicated process, and so far NOBODY knows what this encephalogram will show and what new ideas it will trigger. At present time we build extensively our first snout-base in the Himalayas, and in 2011 we will build there a micro-laboratory, where we can start our elementary experiments, including making encephalograms and so on.<\/p>\n
We know that the limbic system of our brain is quite complicated. But what the most interesting is we think we differ from animals due to our emotions. Our language reflects this opinion, when we match our manifestations of friendliness and compassion against \u201cbeastly\u201d instincts and \u201cbeastliness\u201d. But if somebody wants to find principal differences of humans from animals, then hardly it is in the sphere of emotions. As I have already said, the brain of the animals also has limbic system, which proves indisputably animals have emotions.<\/p>\n
If we input an electrode into some segment of the human limbic system and send a weak electrical charge, imitating activation of that segment with the help of axons, it will trigger symptoms similar to a psychic paroxysm or a paroxysm that drug addicts experience when taking dope. Numerous psychotropic substances impact exactly the limbic system segments of the human brain. Also limbic system includes pituitary that controls endocrine system (and endocrine system dysfunction triggers strong and seemingly unmotivated mood swings), and it is proved that the pituitary \u201cgland\u201d plays the leading role in generating fear and aggression. Hypothalamus is also related to the human emotional activity. If earlier it was presumed the limbic system controls only certain primitive emotions, while the difference of humans consists in the emotional layer in the form of EPs, such as altruism, self-sacrifice, commitment, then it is all not so simple in this subject, as it seems to be from the first glance to a na\u00efve person.<\/p>\n
First of all, we all know the faithfulness and self-sacrifice that dogs are capable of. What they do feel we do not know, of course, but if we judge by their behaviour, then the overwhelming majority of people do not even imagine what the \u201cdog\u2019s altruism\u201d is. Nevertheless, it does not mean that dogs really feel faithful. For example, recently it was discovered that even pithecanthropus had \u201caltruistic behaviour\u201d \u2013 they looked after ill children, invalids and old people. But this term \u201caltruistic bahaviour\u201d can only confuse you, because it designates the outward line of activity and does not manifest the perceptions of people. Possibly it was to the advantage of those pithecanthropuses to prolong the life of each member of the tribe that could work and help the tribe.<\/p>\n
Secondly, if you see a contemporary person sitting on a bed of his old demented mother for years, it does not mean this is an example of true altruism, that this person feels indeed affection and faithfulness towards his repulsive parent. Of course, he does not. There is nothing there, except hatred, disgust and contempt. And it is all hidden behind beautiful pictures and rotten dogmas like \u201che raised me, he gave me life, I feel I must\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n
Thus, there are no grounds to presume that people and animals have ever experienced EPs!<\/p>\n
This is an amazing contradiction. On one hand, in our language there are a lot of words expressing these or those EPs. On the other hand, actually NOBODY EVER experiences them. Some woman, unpleasantly looking and with a dull glance can wander on a path along the forest, being bored to death, she can stop and say \u201cOh God, this is so beautiful\u201d. But she DOES NOT experience the feeling of the beauty. The phrase \u201cI love you so much\u201d hides only jealousy, a wish of possessing and a fear of loneliness, well, in the best case \u2013 friendliness, which means pleasure of filling boredom together.<\/p>\n
Many times I faced a sincere amazement and even resentment, when I stated nobody actually experiences EPs. Well, this naivety is easy to understand \u2013 a wish to think of surrounding people as sensitive is quite strong. But if somebody experiences EPs, it necessarily is accompanied with specific manifestations, their lack proves wrong imagination.<\/p>\n
For example, photographers are often thought to be people capable to experience the feeling of beauty only because their photographs trigger the feeling of beauty. I recommend you visit a forum of professional photographers, find beautiful photographs and read comments of the author, other photographers and amateurs. You will instantly see the difference between what you have imagined and reality!<\/p>\n
There is one more example. Often people that make love are thought to be affectionate and sensitive. But ask one to find resonating descriptions of his feelings and see \u2013 WHAT and HOW he is doing, and the main point \u2013 what he is NOT doing while making love, and everything becomes clear \u2013 this is just a sexual intercourse as an escape from boredom, it is very far from affection.<\/p>\n
There are only a very small number of people that experience EPs and quite rarely \u2013 this is a true fact for anyone experiencing EPs and who is observant and sincere enough.<\/p>\n
So what makes humans and animals different? What is it \u2013 this \u201cspecifically human\u201d, why evolution created such a powerful structure, as neocortex?<\/p>\n
I will bring back to memory the well-known facts.<\/p>\n
Neocortex or \u201cnew cortex\u201d is usually divided into 4 parts \u2013 frontal, parietal, temporal and occipital. Interconnections between them, as well as with sub cortical parts of the brain are extremely complicated, and even in the beginning of the 21st<\/sup> century we are still in the beginning of the research. From what is clear more or less, we can say that frontal lobes are responsible for planning the activity and controlling it (definitely, this is not what differs humans from animals), also for cognition (also not the difference, as many animals are capable of learning \u2013 dolphins, rats, octopuses, dogs, horses \u2013 a lot of animals). Parietal lobes control spatial perception and information exchange between the brain and the body (also it\u2019s not what differs), occipital lobes are responsible for sight (also it\u2019s not what makes difference).<\/p>\n If some part of the brain is damaged, quite often it is successfully compensated by other parts that provide the control of the necessary functions.<\/p>\n Now let us return to the temporal lobe. It looks like it is responsible for especially fine functions and supports the most delicate processes in our psychic system. Particularly, it controls the connection between visual and sound signals. If there is damage to the temporal lobes, it severely impairs comprehension of speaking, though at the same time capabilities to understand written information can remain adequate, or vice versa. Certain damage of temporal lobes can cause definite loss of understanding of certain grammar constructions, e.g. cases and conjugations! In other cases visual differentiation suffers, like the affected man cannot differentiate the beloved girl\u2019s face from a vacuum cleaner.<\/p>\n Apparently, if we try to find a part of the brain responsible for psychic functions that make us significantly different from animals, then these will be definitely temporal lobes of the neocortex firstly, and secondly, parietal lobes, as the damage of the last can cause reading and understanding incapability, as well as decrease abstract thinking severely.<\/p>\n Still, despite of common concepts, even speech is not what makes humans different from animals! During three years that I observed crows in Namcha, they developed their language a lot. Well, this can be referred to my impressionability. But as for the dolphins, it is a true and an indisputable fact that they have a developed language and many dialects (every species has a dialect, which changes depending on the location in the world ocean. More than that, when representatives of different species meet in the sea, they try to negotiate, changing their dialect! (see the researches of Laura May-Collado from Universidad de Puerto Rico, Recinto de Rio Piedras). Dolphins have names and they call each other by names. They can also talk with each other about some third dolphin (see e.g. the researches of Laela Sayigh from University of North Carolina, Wilmington). Parrots are also capable of this (researches of Ralf Wanker from Universit\u00e4t Hamburg).\u00a0 And who knows \u2013 what else will the ethologists discover in the future?<\/p>\n Does it all mean that the enlightex will develop in the temporal and parietal lobes? Will it be a super structure over the neocortex, or will it be just an internal development of new elements in the already existing structure? It seems to me that the last variant is the most probable.<\/p>\n Firstly, in favour of the above said is the fact that the capacity of the brain and the number of the brain neurons extremely exceeds human needs. Humans use only 5% of their brain in the best possible case and this is widely known. Why do we need the remaining 95%? Playing safe? Hardly. Nature does not tolerate such a glaring superfluity. It looks more like a ready blank structure, but the overwhelming majority of people do not want to use it so far, wasting life in dullness and negativeness, having no wish to cultivate EPs.<\/p>\n Secondly, the further growth of the brain would enlarge the size of the head. This is an unbearable situation for childbirth \u2013 nature does not like this kind of extremism. The head of a baby already seems to be inadequately large, and the childbirth with baby\u2019s large head would be too dangerous and painful for the mother, saying nothing of other matters.<\/p>\n Thus, if I was looking for the changes in the brain structures resulting from intensive EPs, I would look for them in the neocortex, first of all in temporal-parietal lobes.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n According to Darwin, a man can be forgiven for being proud from the thought of achieving the top step of the organic scale, even though it\u2019s not due to his own effort. But the fact of having done it inspires hope for the better in the distant future.<\/p>\n He wrote it a hundred and fifty years ago, when he discovered the principal of natural selection, nearly simultaneously with Alfred Russell Wallace. At that time he said of the better future purely theoretically, without making a guess what it would be like and what the path of the human evolution would be. Now we know exactly what path is: into the world of enlightened perceptions.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Labour transformed primates into humans. Anyway, this is the opinion of the majority of adequate scientists in the world. On the basis of the data I know from archeology, genetics, embryology and physiology, this theory seems to me to be correct. (Recently, we can read more about observations, according to which the animals are using […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"parent":6933,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-7049","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n