Moments 11

The heart and mind have two distinct modes of communication. The heart primarily communicates through gnosis, direct knowing, or ‘knowings’, and its wisdom is not bound by time, space, or dimensions, whether or not one realizes that fact. The mind, however, primarily communicates through knowledge as information, a form of given data or speculation. When the mind imposes its mode of communication on the heart, the heart simply retreats, like a beloved who is fed up with you. Here is where the force of will or separate ego is involved, and the heart simply refuses to engage. On the other hand, when the heart commands, the mind obeys, willingly or unwillingly, consciously or unconsciously, whether you resist—kick, buck, and drag your feet, or not. If the heart does not command, it simply invites and accepts. This means, the heart is a faculty of intuitive and holistic wisdom, while the mind is a faculty of information, of interpretive and speculative data.

This is why many great treasures and divine graces come and are given before the mind ever finds out about it, then at some opportune moment one begins to gradually discover this or that great encounter or miracle or awakening that was far more powerful than one had imagined. The encounter happened when the mind was out of the way, and the mind thereafter attempts to translate the experience. The physical aspect of the encounter, when the mind is involved, is at the tail end of that experience, which had begun long before the mind knew of it. That is the very nature of grace, to taunt the mind with its many mysteries, then appear suddenly as if out of nowhere, and we call it a miracle, awakening, or something of the kind. But it was in motion long before its physical appearance, and all such experiences and encounters serve a far greater purpose, which is why they unveil over longer periods with a sudden appearance of a radical transformation.

At this point in the discussion, given that I am speaking about the heart and mind so broadly, it is hard to know what is meant exactly by the words mind or heart, or by the above suggestions. I do not think one could escape the mystery or the broad nature of the subject. But there are ways to build a certain consensus in our understanding, and perhaps find those facts that support these suggestions.

Examining the subject more closely, the mind’s mode of pure reason is carried out by imposing its will, for that is its nature, while what is natural to it is un-natural to the heart. This is why with reason we push for objectivity, although it is never quite finalized. On the other hand, the heart’s mode is by command, invitation or acceptance, and a profound sense of empathy and connection, which we simply find in the rhythms of life, very naturally, what simply is. This explains why the mind often complains in protest, while the heart accepts, invites, and finds empathy, or commands. It is also why the mind constantly meddles in doubt, while the heart is a faculty of certitude and trust. This further implies, the mind’s will to power is often narrow and afflicted by prejudice or tunnel vision, because there is always more to be had and it is never quite enough; whereas, the heart’s will to power is by true love and wisdom, because it deals in joy and contentment. In other words, one is the love of power, and the other is the power of love, but in the end power stands down before love and is humbled by it.

Now let us see if we could examine certain concrete facts and metaphors. There is a great deal of information on this topic, albeit it often lacks the subtlety of vision and insight, inner sight, the heart’s vision.

There is the fascinating tale of the Garden of Eden in the Bible, Genesis 2 and 3. In that garden there are two significant trees, among the many trees: The tree of life, which symbolizes eternal life; and the tree of knowledge, or the knowledge of good and evil. Adam and Eve are first given access to the tree of life and the surrounding trees, but forbidden to eat from the tree of knowledge. After they disobey this mandate and eat from the tree of knowledge, they’re also restricted from the tree of life.

I have often wondered if one tree is symbolically pointing out the dual nature of the mind-brain, in which light and darkness or good and evil are in opposition or in sharp contrast to one another. Since the mind serves as an information bank, it must have contrasting shades of data in order to process that data, meaning it is binary in nature like a computer, which is a processing unit. So it must be given (or have the input) ‘light’ to imagine its opposite, or it must be given (or have the input) ‘love’ to imagine hate, and the like. It can not know a thing in itself as it is, except in contrast to its opposite or other shades of in-betweens. And the very organ of the brain is also a divided organ, almost completely in two separate hemispheres. Therefore, this mind-brain, which behaves much like a bio-computer and processing unit, would obviously fit the metaphor of the tree of knowledge. Could the tree of life then be referring to the heart, which is described by biologists as a “unitary organ”, since all of its four chambers are enclosed within one body; in contrast to the brain which is binary by nature and subdivided biologically? And both organs appear to represent a tree-like image in their various stages of growth, symbolically and biologically, while the central nervous system and all other organs represent tree-like growths—a garden of “many trees”. And what might be the reason for being prohibited to eat from this tree of duality, and once having eaten from it, why were Adam and Eve restricted to eat from the tree of life?

Turning from the analogy of the garden to a parallel human experience, I will now briefly look at the work of Dr. Jill Bolte Taylor, a Harvard brain researcher (Neural-Anatomist), known for her TED-Ed Talk “Stroke of Insight” (https://youtu.be/mYD7Y9CXeUw, June 24, 2025). She offers a remarkable account of an experience that completely transformed her life. This further helps us in understanding the dual nature of the mind-brain. In her talk she explained that for the first time she was able to study her own brain from within her mind, when she suddenly found herself amidst a brain stroke. And she frequently remarks on the irony of a brain researcher having a brain stroke with resounding humor; while one aspect of her consciousness was suspended in a state of awe and unity, and another, the rational researcher, was making every attempt to examine and control the phenomena. The former was predominantly the function of the right hemisphere of her brain, while the latter was of the left hemisphere. The whole experience felt to her as though she was at once looking in from without and looking out from within the two hemispheres of her brain.

Dr. Taylor beautifully deciphers her thesis, mainly that at the moment of her stroke she realized just how unique and distinct was her perception while looking in and out through the left hemisphere, versus through the right hemisphere of her brain. She also shows us a real human brain, as a demonstration of just how separate and divided the two hemispheres are, and that she could clearly discern that division also within her perception during her stroke. In the end, she concludes that her experience of awe, beauty, and union with all life, was clearly at home in the right hemisphere of her brain, as well as her deep desire to remain in that state of timeless awareness; while the left hemisphere could only scrutinize and assess a series of logical action steps required urgently at the moment—like the desperate attempt to gain control of her motor functions in order to call for help. Then just as she would gain some degree of control, she watched as ‘the other half’ would distract and seduce her to remain in her former state of bliss.

I will now further elaborate on that state of bliss like the one that Dr. Taylor speaks of from yet another perspective, in order to further clarify the discussion. Many who have experienced what is known as a “Near Death Experience” (NDE), have journeyed further than Dr. Taylor. As a side note, the field of NDE research is some 50 years since its conception, founded by renowned philosopher and psychiatrist Dr. Raymond A. Moody. That is to say there is now a diverse and contradictory range of data among hundreds of thousands of experiencers; while at the same time, certain features across the collected data remain consistent. One such experience, a particular stage within the NDE, is known as an “out of body” experience or OBE, which is similar to what Dr. Taylor described; however, among NDE experiencers this feature of the experience is often extended into the recognition of a consciousness that moves on as a person clinically dies, often realizing a different sort of body houses that consciousness, a luminous body that they take to mean their soul.

I have spoken of Dr. Taylor’s experience and the field of NDE research (and the luminous body), since I myself have experienced something similar to both, except that my experience was more of the latter. More importantly, the issue moves beyond the realm of whether this subject is concerning the actual organ of the heart or brain. This is, in part, why I have also mentioned the issue of a soul or luminous body that resumes life after death, as well as the qualitative aspects of an experience, like Dr. Taylor’s experience of beauty and union.

Another piece of research takes us a step further. This speaks to the heart’s superior power and intelligence, something that I earlier pointed to as the heart’s ‘command’. A well-known international organization, The HeartMath Institute (HeartMath.org) is another resourceful center of research for many global publications, but it was through their first text-book, “The HeartMath Solution” that I became aware of their work. This work chronicles the history of science and scientists that show extensive research on the heart as an organ of consciousness. According to HeartMath, the heart generates fields of electric and magnetic pulsation and energy. These fields may be measured in today’s research labs, and HeartMath points out the all important discovery that there is an actual “brain in the heart” with its own neurons, similar to that of the brain—far fewer and simpler than those in the brain, yet much more powerful in their scope of generating electrical pulses and magnetic fields. They state unequivocally:

The heart’s electrical field is about 60 times greater in amplitude than the electrical activity generated by the brain. This field, measured in the form of an electrocardiogram (ECG), can be detected anywhere on the surface of the body. Furthermore, the magnetic field produced by the heart is more than 100 times greater in strength than the field generated by the brain and can be detected up to 3 feet away from the body, in all directions, using SQUID-based magnetometers. (https://www.heartmath.org/research/science-of-the-heart/energetic-communication/, June 26, 2025)

This is to say, it is clear that more than just the right hemisphere of the brain—which is perhaps a bridge along that path—the actual human heart is far more powerful than the brain. In this regard, like HeartMath Institute, many other spiritual communities throughout history have stressed in their voluminous books and curriculums the recognition and development of that heart and its powers. As far back as the Greeks, and even prior to that, within early Confucian and Buddhist texts, like Wang Yangming’s “School of the Heart” and “The Heart Sutras” of the Buddha, and later, within Jewish, Christian and Islamic texts of the great mystics, like Ibn ‘Arabi (1165-1240) and Teresa of Ávila (1515-1582), the role of the heart comes up again and again in myriad ways, while the Holy Quran makes mention of the heart with various expressions more than some 250 times.

For those that may be interested in my master’s thesis: (“Theophanies, Intuition and the Heart Faculty; Philosophers who get out of their heads for love’s sake.”) I get into the theosophical and theological practices pertaining to the heart. Although it is a somewhat boring academic paper, it entails an in-depth look at various practices and schools of thought among the great traditions. How it relates to this piece is that I found myself in a similar predicament while I write this, of whether to take a more empirical and science-based approach in presenting the importance of the heart, or pursue a more esoteric and spiritual approach. In this one I have decided to take a more pragmatic and esoteric approach, while mentioning the science for those that may be interested.

Back to the main topic or thesis in this writing, namely that the heart and mind have two distinct modes of communication, and what that implies. The science on this topic could go in various directions, and there are some very fascinating key areas of research. I have already mentioned the electrical and magnetic pulses that the heart generates, and how this relates to the heart’s superior power and intelligence. One could pursue that vein of research into “heart-brain connection” versus “brain-heart connection” in order to establish “heart-brain coherence”. Within that—the disharmony (incoherence) of heart-brain versus the harmony (coherence)—there is the role of emotions in cognition, especially the difference between emotions that congregate in promoting a life of stress, doubt, fear, denial, depression, and other such vices, versus those that help cultivate great virtues like, patience and compassion. There is also the ethical implications of this idea, and this is where philosophers with a mystical bent, like Spinoza, speak of the connection between emotions and the cultivation of virtues, the role of positive and negative emotions. Positive emotions help cultivate virtues, while negative emotions become a breeding ground for vices. But I doubt Spinoza, and most western philosophers for that matter, understood the heart-brain connection here. Another important facet of this discussion in science is how the ‘Vagus Nerve’ and ‘Neuroplasticity’ is related to the heart-brain connection, and what is ‘Vagus Nerve Stimulation (VNS)’ in relation to heart issues, healing, and trauma, including the treatment of long term chronic issues, like the ‘re-wiring’ and healing of childhood trauma and grief. Then again there are direct correlations between the Vagus Nerve and the Thymus Gland, which produces life-saving T-cells, white blood cells that help ‘adaptive immunity’, the immune system’s ‘adaptive’ ability to produce white blood cells that destroy foreign invaders like viruses and bacteria.

One could also apply the Aristotelian notion of ‘first principles’ so as to explain the heart’s primacy as the first organ to form in the fetus, of which the central nervous system is born, allowing for a tree-like growth along its channels with the formation of various organs up and down those channels. This helps explain “the spirited” aspect of the human form, or the soul, in order to answer the question of what animates the body. It also ties into ancient discussions that center on the humors, like similar discussions within Chinese and Ayurvedic (Indian) ancient medicines. More on this in my thesis (link above), however that provides only an interesting, albeit important, theoretical background.

Then from a more pragmatic spiritual standpoint, there is the throat region, a central location between the heart and the brain. It’s also related to what is termed “throat chakra” or an electromagnetic center in that locale. Within various esoteric and ancient teachings, as well as by the use of common-sense and intuition, we gather that the throat region along with the tongue is an organ of speech and sound. Thus speaking truthfully, or not, clearly plays a part in terms of how the heart and mind remain allies or live as estranged neighbors. In this regard, I have often felt the statement, “Love thy neighbor as yourself,” first applies to the mind. It also ties back to the Garden of Eden story. To a mind that thinks in binary and dualistic terms, a mind that is an enemy-maker, it is said, “love thy neighbor,” the heart, the same way that the heart-mind and body love you despite all your transgressions, self-abuse or mistreatments of yourself. Don’t we all often wonder about the resilience of this mechanism that lives through so much? This is the awe and wonder of that universal intelligence that communicates through the heart, the intuitive faculties, and reaches the mind—also saying, “Don’t lie,” because that universal intelligence does not live in the mind‘s battlefields of truths and lies, it only tells the truth and knows no lie, but it has to speak to this mind in its own language and terms.

In this regard then, touching on speech and sound, language regulates the ‘commands’ that pass through the heart and mind. Speaking consciously and positively, or truthfully, clearly affects our consciousness and the kinds of emotional and physiological changes that creates. It also touches on our ethical concerns in terms of the kinds of virtues we cultivate and practice in our speech. Meanwhile, denial, lies, repressed feelings, trauma, grief, and stress—and a kind of language that fosters unconscious behavior and ignorance, would clearly be a breeding ground for vices, sickness, and addiction in the mind and body.

More can be said on this topic of speech and truth-telling, and why language and sound, which stand between the heart and mind, play such important part in our lives. Yes, there is much that can be said about sound and vibration here too. There is the whole field of musical genius as the universal language of the soul, and sound healing as a field of study and modern science in itself. One could delve into all that. So now, do all these things help understand how and why the mind and heart have two distinct modes of communication, and how we could better understand or create harmony between them? Perhaps to some extend. But one is not deeply satisfied with such answers, although these answers provide ample evidence of the things that may be true. And it is a worthy cause to investigate these subjects deeply. However, in the end, I am not more fully satisfied, and yet if I provide an answer to my satisfaction, many will label it as “too esoteric” and “mystical”. There is no escaping that. Hopefully, so far I have provided enough experiential ground and intuitive common-sense for those who are interested.

If I was asked, however, why and how the heart and mind have these two distinct modes, I would say, one could only discern this phenomena through meditation and contemplation. This is why the greatest mystics the history has ever known have not given us much information on the mechanics of this. Instead, for instance, when you look at the life of a Mother Teresa of Calcutta, you find that it was estimated that her work saved the lives of some 25,000 children a month—according to numerous documentaries (names forthcoming)—without an understanding of such mechanics pertaining to the heart or mind. When asked what was the key to her success, in numerous documentaries and in her Nobel peace prize speech, she always quoted this passage attributed to Jesus in the Holy Bible, “Whatever you did for the least of these, you have done unto me (Matthew 25:40),” and the passage continues to express who “the least of these” are; the hungry, the thirsty, the estranged, the needy, naked (without cloths), sick and imprisoned. Whatever was done for their care or lack thereof, was done to Jesus himself, and without care for them, Jesus would tell those who claimed to know him that they in fact have not known him. A message to take to heart during these times! So Mother Teresa often said, she fed, cloths, and helped heal Jesus, which sounds somewhat sensational, but when she was pressed she simply stated, Jesus himself had told her so. Point being, it is just such answers that seem to be given by the great sages and mystics, as proof for such truly profound miracles in service to humanity, for their compassion and care for others— not the mechanics of the heart or mind.

In a more spiritual vein, the great spiritual masters and mystic sages provide voluminous works on their practices, like the Confucian and Sufi sages. Once more I get into this at greater length in my thesis (link to underlined title above), but briefly here, if one were to examine the works of Ibn ‘Arabi, amidst hundreds if not thousands of writings, while he speaks frequently of the heart, he speaks in a language that is highly experiential and esoteric. It is clear that while he speaks at great length on the path and the many stages and stations of awakening and spiritual development, his experiences and language seem outside the scope of most humans. Likewise a great Christian mystic like Padre Pio, speaking on his relationship with Christ and the Divine Mother, while a great deal of autobiographical literature exists on this, much of it remains untouchable by most of us.

It is clear then that a mapping of the mechanics of the mind or heart, or the science or an analytic psychology as such, does not seem to factor into the works of the great mystics. Although it could be argued that some have made certain headways in that direction, that’s not their main focus. It is only a certain mindset that insists on analysis or empirical data according to modern science, which does not address the core of the issue. From the view of a person who is deeply interested or sincere, as is the case in the lives of the great sages and mystics, the practical and experiential dimensions always take precedence. While it appears to be the case that a certain data according to certain expectations is missing, which is often the case made by atheists against spiritual discourse, it is not so. Rather, a very unique language catered to the individual seeker’s growth and development is borne of one’s connection to source and divinity, and that is generally only accessed inwardly through meditation, contemplation, and other related practices. So that the data that exists supports the overall possibility of direct experience. It only goes that far until the experience is had, and those who only search for the information—i.e. those whose approach is purely mind centered—are usually mislead and unable to access the correct information or guidance. 

Whether the great sages choose to speak of their awakenings at great length or not, their words and ideas are often not in the general scheme of normative science and philosophy. Sometimes it is assumed, perhaps they are speaking to a chosen audience, maybe an elite or underground group of seekers, however, that’s not the case. Rather, as I have said, briefly, the spiritual journey, while it has its objective goals and means, is very unique to each one. While the journey is founded on universal axioms and wisdom, it is from a place or space deep within, purely and holy experiential. It is contact with some other notion of time and space, transcendent and divine, and yet giving rise to this very moment—this time and space. The subjective and intersubjective, as well as the creative faculty (of a divine or spiritual source) come into play. Experience leads and becomes the teacher. In that language, we find states and stations pertaining to both, heart and mind.

All this to say, in one sense, there is something like a great divide between the heart and mind. The approach of one does not help the other, because while the former must lead and the latter must follow that is not how society is run in general. In reality, one should be the master and the other the pupil; however, as we see in society the opposite is often the case, egos assuming mastery when they have none, the mind’s games of the blind leading the blind, or the mind and heart living as estranged neighbors and often worse, as resentful neighbors or even as enemies. This tells us we have not bridged that great divide of the heart and mind. So what would it be like if that wisdom of the heart that is purely and holy experiential led the way, while the mind learned to live as a loving neighbor next to the heart?

… to be continued.

—Houman Z.Emami

🙏🏻🤍🙏🏻🤍