Oh my mind?

Oh my mind?

Ho do you define normality. Is perceived set of cultures define by a group of people defines normal? Do the culturally bounded humans perceive a set of values as normal?  If these sets of values are normal, what is abnormal then? How you differentiate normal and abnormal. Why can’t we have values without a boundary? Values remained values as they are without definition. Values not given a meaning are meaningless?  Why can’t we look at things as they are without given our specific judgment? Why can’t we perceive things as it is rather than looking at it with our veils? Values are imposed on humans. These values are thought to humans till they are perceived as normal. These so called values are perceived since the centuries as norm of human beings.  As long as our mind perceives values as acceptance rather than imposition, the mind remained bounded. It remained bounded to the set of values forced into it. The mind remained confined to the set of values. It knows no freedom. The mind become restless the moment the values removed from it slightest sight. The moment the concept of mind conceptualized and perceived, it forgets the master. It by itself remained as master. It ‘s strengthened by its own belief. The mind become solidifies by re-enforcement of its own kind. The more it tries to untangle from its clutch, the more it get entangled. Gradually, it accepts the entanglement as part of itself.  Entanglement is mind.  The more entangled the mind is, the greater the achievement it perceives.  The achievement of a tangled mind is rewarded.  Rewards that further encourage entanglement. It’s exponentially rewarding. 

            Mind oh minds, why I am created. What am I? Again I am trying to define myself. Defining by giving meaning to myself. Defining by giving substance to myself. Defining to give value to myself.  Defining to create an identity to myself. So is it the identity that strengthens the mind. Mind oh minds, who am I. Am I John, Peter, William, Sarah, Rose, Linda? What if I am nobody? What if I remained as I am without the mind? But than, who is this I? Is the ‘I’ the mind or the mind is the ‘I’? Or both the “I” and mind are one.  Or is my body is ‘I’ and mind just attached to it.  Or the mind is the ‘I’ and the body is attached to it. How if the mind, the body and the ‘I’ are not connected at all at the first place? Are they three different entities? The three defines human? Is it possible for this ‘I’ to live without the mind? Is it possible the mind to live without the ‘I’? Is it possible the ‘I’ and the mind just be there without the boundary? Where the body comes into the picture than?

            Is it possible the body comes at birth without the mind and ‘I’? It remained as a body without any thoughts. It remained as a body of a baby without the name given by the owners, (parents). The mind comes later.  The so-called ‘I’ is not an actual ‘I’ but the ‘I’ identified by the parents to the body. The body still can’t perceive the ‘I’ given to it. It needs the mind to tell the body about the ‘I’. So, without the mind, the body cannot identify or defines itself with the ‘I’. So when the mind comes? When the naked body identified by the mind as ‘I’? Why at the first place the mind has to come to tell the body about the ‘I’? Is it possible to remove the mind from the body entirely so the ‘I’ never identified. Is it possible the body lives with the mind without the identification of the ‘I’.  But the moment the mind recognizes the body the sense of ‘I’ is perceived.

            Body is a matter of cells, a mass of protoplasm, which biologically functions with or without the mind. Is the mind really needed for the body to function? How about animals? Do animals have mind? Are the animals functioning with the mind or just with the body? If mind is something 100% needed for the body to function than all animals even the smallest bacteria or viruses has mind. So if the animals have mind, can they have emotions too?

Ok, Lets come back to humans.

            Lets come to an agreement. The body comes first, later the mind comes to be identified with body and ‘I’ defined by the mind. So the ‘I’ cannot stand alone without the mind or the body. The ‘I’ needs the mind and the body. The ‘I’ needs the mind to tell the body it is the ‘I’. So, who is this ‘I’?

            Do we really know when the mind starts it journey? Do we really know when the mind starts to incorporate the body into it as one and as the ‘I’, which is perceived by the mind?  Is it possible the mind knows nothing till it is thought?  So who is the first culprit to teach the mind to identify with the body and to perceive it as ‘I’? So who is the culprit to teach the mind to identify itself with the given name?

            Yes, the thought arises and the mind given birth. The set of collection of thoughts forms the mind. What are thoughts than? Is it the stimulus received by the body creates thoughts? Is it possible for the thoughts to arise without the stimulus? Is it possible to create a state of thoughtlessness with the entire stimulus removed from the body? So, if the five senses in which the body communicates with the surrounding removed, can the thought process stops? Would elimination of the visual, hearing, taste, smell and touch inputs, stops the brain from generating these thoughts?  Is it possible for a man to have no thoughts without these five senses? There are only two ways to live without all the senses, either by cutting off the connections between the senses and the brain or take away the organs that are responsible for generating senses.  Is it possible for a man to have all the five senses and the connections of the senses to his brain and still remain thoughtlessness? Is it possible to achieve a state in which the thoughtlessness remains despite of intact senses and the connections to the brain? The thoughtlessness stage or mind would see the body as it is without identifying it as ‘I”. The state itself would cease all the boundaries between the mind, the body and the ‘I’.