No-Brain and No-Mind
We are tangible human beings living in a tangible
world within a tangible cosmos, and there is little doubt about this
reality unless we look at it from the standpoint of pure nuclear physics
or, perhaps, within the context of some great metaphysical system.
Our brain is a complex, very complex indeed, piece of biological machinery
which reacts both to its own and the surrounding environment within
a given time frame and impinging or perceived events, according to
sense perceptions. This reaction to the environment and it constraints
sums up and create an individual personality which learns to cope
and react with its own environment as it seems more fit to the same.
This piece of machinery is not automatic and unconscious since within
ample limits it has freedom of choice in this physical world, this
apparent freedom of choice being dictated by some sort of
analytical response that we call intelligence. These two, personality
and intelligence (or better, intellect) together with the imprinted
record of experience act in concert within a mental frame which makes
- or sums up - what we call psyche. Hence the psyche - broadly
- sums up as personality plus intellect plus experience. Personality,
intellect and experience are to us as tangible as they are abstract:
they are mental concepts, so much so as their summation - the psyche
- is. We cannot commit spatiality and palpable properties to the psyche
or any of its constituents, these all are by being not in terms of
physical - or material - tangibility: to all extents we can sense
or create them within a given mind's frame - the imagination - but
in reality none of them exists. We have been able to detect, in the
nuclear word, the antithesis of matter - or antimatter - but have
not been able to detect a psyche's particle whatsoever while we see
this entity's effect in molding, creating and destructing at will
whatever is perceivable by the senses, the physical world and, aided
by its creative science and related technological creations, the intra-physical
world as well.
The brain is the painter the mind is the canvas the psyche is the observer
If we try to explain the origin of life so as we perceive
it in the sacred literature of the world, and likewise in its mythology,
we see remarkable parallels, independently of the geographical origin
of the sacred texts. This is not within the scope of this work and will
be left to the faithful, but for the addition of a few remarks. One
is that science is now explaining, with consistent proof, many of these
narrations even in terms of different worlds and diverse - alien - forms
of life. The other one concerns the archetypal contents of humanity,
which, as already noted, has some gaps since many of these archetypes
could not have entered humanity's infancy if such perception - or mind
contents - must be explained as the experience of the species, therefore
the archetypes's theory should be revisited even if it might upset many
contemporary psychological notions. My tendency is to state that mind
can perceive realms which do not lie within the normal standard of time
as we perceive it or, else, that the mind - in its pristine nakedness
beyond the material world - knows no time and in suitable conditions
we can be transported to those strange kingdoms where it liberally roams
to add to our delights or sorrows since we are simply ignorant of its
The next step in reasoning concerns the origin of life and the why of life. We are well aware of ourselves, our surroundings and, above all, our individuality. And here we meet the great illusion, the paramount maya, and fall again in the vicious circle of speculation. The truth might very well be that we do not have an individuality, we do not even live a personal life even if all appearances assert the contrary. And this can be summed up in a few words: it is Life that lives us, not us that live a life. We are the experience of Life and not the other way around. Incidentally, this might explain the memory of the species and the vision of the mystic. But this, in this wise, does not concern just ourselves, but the whole cosmos, in terms of what the Hindus called "Brahman  Lila" , or the play of the cosmic creator, or Brahma. And this makes sense both as to the what and the why of life but only if we admit a creator.
Up to this point we can even survive without a (self-created?) creator in terms of religious thought whilst the next question is forbidden ground in terms of rational thinking: the purpose behind life, or, if any, the intelligence and scope behind life. If we can perceive and sense the infinite, expressed as life, there is no way to go beyond while we are wrapped in our individuality in a three-dimensional world. The moment that we will be divested of any shadow of materiality a better comprehension of life will arise - that will be Life's own comprehension, that of the Life living us which, itself, is possibly eternally striving to find its roots just like here we strive to find ours.
"I am the Deep. I will not let you hear about it." 
is meant by 'categories' is the partnership of Heaven and Earth, the
complementarity of the moon and sun, the mutuality of female and male."
Joseph Needham - Science an Civilization in China, Volume 5 - p. 319
- Cambridge University Press- 1980.