I see some of ancient masters gobbledygook as somehow "valid good insights" but expressed in a time where there was no neuroscience and the best theory of matter was that we had earth, wind, fire, air and water. This is why it seems a bit gobbledygook, and noone really understand the concepts of spirit mind, earth and fire anymore
As a physicist, I think what we called mind and spirit in medieval times are simply encoded in the STATES of matter(the body), and in the BEHAVIOUR of matter. Ie. how it responds to perturbation from the environment. So they are surely dependent on each other to the point of beeing two sides of the same coin. None make sense with the other. This can be at least reasonably understood without medieval terminolgy.
You mentioned the gobbledygook of quantum mechanics. There is a ALOT of published pop sci crap on this topic, that often originates from misinterpreting what the concept of an "observer" means in physics. It's commonly confused with suggesting that a living brain or conscioussness is required for the theory of matter to make sense, and there there is a connection between the theory of matter and the brain. It is also often turned around, suggesting that quantum mechanics can help us understan consciusness. I think this is all baloney that brings disgrace to the topic.
An "observer" is nothing but a material measurement device, and whatever the oberver "knows" and "learns" is necessarily encoded in it's own physical microstate. I think the matter/body - constrains the mind and spirit, no body no mind/spirit possible. But also the mind/spirit is what hels stabilized the matter/body, as selfpreservation.
In the MA context, I think muscle memory, conditioned reflexes and the higher cognitive layers that we humans have, to modulate and control our behaviour is what we continously "tune" as we train. When I can do my spinning jumps kicks as naturally as when I put up my hands for proteaction as I fall on the ground, maybe I am getting closer to the goal.
I think there IS a way to understand conceptally quantum entanglement, and the "game of expectations" by an ANALOGY that of a fighting games but it can be a topic for antoher thread. The question to ask is, what determines your and your opponents fighting strategy? The premise is that each figther can only GUESS to other persons move, right? So manipulating your opponents expectations (regardless of wether they are true or false) changes the whole fight. These mind games are also REAL, and they are I would say (by analogy) also similar to quantum interactions, thisi s what makes it different from classical mechanics.
Big words giving to trouble? 
