2 Sleep Perchance to Dream

2 Sleep Perchance to Dream

For the last two months or so, I have been considering death and the afterlife. I have been having a spiritual crisis (as I have every few years) over an irrational fear of death, and have been struggling with my faith to find comfort. Recently I began to consider the relationship of sleep and dreams to the consciousness state of death; this sermon is the outcome of those considerations

One wonders why I should fear a death of non-existence, when I am surrounded by so much evidence to that contradicts the very idea. In truth, I participate daily in spiritual prayer activities which clearly, unequivocally affirm the existence of non-physical presences --I KNOW there is non-physical intelligence in the universe; and yet, I just don't have enough personal confirmations of this reality that specifically include ME, (or who I THINK I am) to give me absolute confidence in the proposition of an ETERNAL ME. Let's put it another way, my mind is made up but my body is still egocentrically opposed to non-existence.

So, my mind is completely made up, and all the arguments in favor of life after death are firmly in place; and yet I still have doubts, moments of panic when I face the unimaginable prospect of non-existence. In the face of oblivion, doubt rages within me and I pace the floor in a frenzy.

It is some comfort to know that even C.S. Lewis occasionally had periods of doubt; and furthermore, to Kierkegaard, doubt was actually part and parcel of the faith package.

"The leap of faith is his conception of how an individual would believe in God or how a person would act in love. Faith is not a decision based on evidence that, say, certain beliefs about God are true or a certain person is worthy of love. No such evidence could ever be enough to completely justify the kind of total commitment involved in true religious faith or romantic love. Faith involves making that commitment anyway.

A leap of faith according to Kierkegaard involves circularity insofar as a leap is made by faith. In his book The Concept of Anxiety, he describes the core part of the leap of faith, the leap. He does this using the famous story of Adam and Eve, particularly Adam's qualitative leap into sin. Adam's leap signifies a change from one quality to another, mainly the quality of possessing no sin to the quality of possessing sin. Kierkegaard maintains that the transition from one quality to another can take place only by a "leap". When the transition happens, one moves directly from one state to the other, never possessing both qualities."

From this preceding sentence I believe for the term "leap" we may substitute: "shift along a continuum of graduated levels". This is, indeed, the subject line for  this sermon: dreams, sleep, and death are all points on a continuum of consciousness states. Now, I'm giving you the punchline here, before the setup, but I sort of want to tell the story, in a roundabout way, of how I came to this conclusion; the conclusion is this:

I have extolled from this pulpit, for years, the importance of fluidity between levels of consciousness, but, in my stupidity, it never occurred to me to think of death as just one more level of consciousness within an infinite array of possible levels of consciousness. I have now accepted this premise.

Furthermore, I have often spoken of music as a transmitter of higher-level spiritual reality into a lower-level material reality; I am thereby familiar with the experience of shifts in consciousness levels, and the subtle imprint these shifts makes on the literal consciousness. Once again, especially through music, the IDENTITY of higher consciousness levels has long been intimately known to me, but, until now, the connection between music and death has not been obvious. The sehnsucht aspect of music is the most fragile and tender of aesthetic responses,(it is my favorite experience), but, so far, I have never been willing to go the distance, and hear the call of death in every strain of Bach. Now I do.

I have worked to develop a sense experience of the higher vibratory self, with which I may identify, but, until now, I have never had the confidence in it (or the faith) necessary to fully give up my identification with the chattering monkey mind in favor of this higher vibratory identity. Now I am.

Accepting this deeper understanding of the scope of the mobile consciousness, has deeply affected my priorities. It now seems to me that: a person's ability, to move through different levels of consciousness, might very well prove to be a reliable index of his spiritual advancement. Certainly an adept at this control of vibratory rate would have little fear of death.

But let's start over: allow me to backtrack a bit, and detail the question that initiated, and eventually led me through, this particular spiritual crisis:
  
I was thinking about sleep, when I began having these death-anxiety attacks. I was thinking about how every night I cease to exist, and then come back to life in the morning. If my consciousness ceases to exist in sleep, in a faint, in a coma, why should I fear death? I'm very familiar with non-existence in that context. However, the thought of never waking up is very upsetting. On the other hand, what about this UNCONSCIOUS everybody is talking about? How can it BE, if it is unconscious? Is this another one of those psychic realities that depends on anecdotal evidence to confirm its existence? I mean OTHER people can experience YOUR unconscious, but can YOU?

The whole question of sleep led me to consider different levels of consciousness as elements in a macrocosmic view of death. I asked, among others, this question: "Where does sleep fit into a comprehensive spiritual discipline?"

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:

"Sleeping is associated with a state of muscle relaxation and limited perception of environmental stimuli.
In animals, sleep is a naturally recurring state characterized by altered consciousness, relatively inhibited sensory activity, and inhibition of nearly all voluntary muscles. It is distinguished from wakefulness by a decreased ability to react to stimuli, and it is more easily reversible than being in hibernation or a coma.

Physiology
In mammals and birds, sleep is divided into two broad types: rapid eye movement (REM sleep) and non-rapid eye movement (NREM or non-REM sleep). Each type has a distinct set of associated physiological and neurological features. REM sleep is associated with the capability of dreaming. The American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM) divides NREM into three stages: N1, N2, and N3, the last of which is also called delta sleep or slow-wave sleep.

    •    NREM stage 1: This is a stage between sleep and wakefulness. The muscles are active, and the eyes roll slowly, opening and closing moderately.
    •    NREM stage 2: theta activity In this stage, it gradually becomes harder to awaken the sleeper; the alpha waves of the previous stage are interrupted by abrupt activity called sleep spindles and K-complexes.
    •    NREM stage 3: Formerly divided into stages 3 and 4, this stage is called slow-wave sleep (SWS). SWS is initiated in the preoptic area and consists of delta activity, high amplitude waves at less than 3.5 Hz. The sleeper is less responsive to the environment; many environmental stimuli no longer produce any reactions.
    •    Slow-wave sleep (SWS), often referred to as deep sleep, consists of stage 3 and 4 of non-rapid eye movement sleep, now combined as stage 3.
    •    Slow-wave sleep is considered important to consolidate new memories.
    •    Sleep deprivation studies with humans suggest that the primary function of slow-wave sleep may be to allow the brain to recover from its daily activities. As it turns out, glucose metabolism in the brain increases as a result of tasks that demand mental activity. Other functions slow-wave sleep can affect include the secretion of growth hormone. It is always greatest during this stage. It is also thought to be responsible for a decrease in sympathetic and increase in parasympathetic neural activity."

[Sidebar: One of the primary articles of my spiritual catechism is that the brain is merely a muscle, it is not the SEAT of consciousness. My experience of my higher, inarticulate, self has affirmed this principle. And yet all the research on consciousness focusses on brain function more than anything else: what if the brain really IS the SEAT of CONSCIOUSNESS? To put it another way: what if a person's spiritual vibration is incapable of manifestation WITHOUT the brain as a SEAT, a CONDUIT, a TRANSMITTER? What if, without manifestation, there is no existence? You see why I'm worried?

Back to Wikipedia:]

"•    REM: The sleeper now enters rapid eye movement (REM) where most muscles are paralyzed. REM sleep is turned on by acetylcholine secretion and is inhibited by neurons that secrete serotonin. This level is also referred to as paradoxical sleep because the sleeper, although exhibiting EEG waves similar to a waking state, is harder to arouse than at any other sleep stage. Vital signs indicate arousal and oxygen consumption by the brain is higher than when the sleeper is awake. An adult reaches REM approximately every 90 minutes, with the latter half of sleep being more dominated by this stage. REM sleep occurs as a person returns to stage 1 from a deep sleep. The function of REM sleep is uncertain but a lack of it will impair the ability to learn complex tasks."

[Sidebar: I find this fact about dreaming very provocative:

"Vital signs indicate arousal and oxygen consumption by the brain is higher than when the sleeper is awake."

Could this POSSIBLY be some kind of indicator of spirit consciousness? Do we mean by "raised consciousness" "increased oxygen consumption by the brain"? Below we will encounter another definition of "raised consciousness" that will thicken the plot even further.

Back to Wikipedia:]

"Below is a hypnogram showing sleep cycles from midnight to 6.30 am, with deep sleep early on. There is more REM (marked red) before waking.

An adult reaches REM approximately every 90 minutes, with the latter half of sleep being more dominated by this stage. REM sleep occurs as a person returns to stage 1 from a deep sleep.The function of REM sleep is uncertain but a lack of it will impair the ability to learn complex tasks.

One approach to understanding the role of sleep is to study the deprivation of it. During this period, the EEG pattern returns to high frequency waves which look similar to the waves produced while the person is awake

30 seconds of deep (stage N3) sleep.

A screenshot of a PSG of a person in REM sleep. Eye movements highlighted by red box."

So we can see that psychic experiences such as dreaming and psychic experiences such as REM sleep are linked, if not indistinguishable from each other. Our flights, into the technicolor world of dreams, result in experiential reports remarkably like the reports of soul travel in the astral plane, and encounters with living, archetypal symbols in art. Thus, wonder of wonders, the charts above indicate that the reception of material from the collective unconscious (the archetypal dream image) is actually MEASURABLE by the equipment in a neurology lab! Does this make it physical--or is spiritual energy susceptible to objective measure? Or is the incarnation of spiritual energy, into the physical, as much a physical event as it is a spiritual event? Is it both equally at once, or is it both, in different proportions?

Speaking of brain unconsciousness, what about near-death experiences? In brain death, those laboratory instruments would measure NOTHING, and yet NDE subjects still see visions, hear sounds, and witness, from above, their own doctors trying to coax their consciousness back into their bodies.

Back to Wikipedia:

"Near-death experiences have been described in medical journals as hallucinatory, and such prescient information supposedly gained from NDEs as merely coincidental and dubious. Ketamine, a dissociative hallucinogen, has been shown to replicate compounds of near-death experiences. Lucid dreaming too induces experiences quite similar to those of NDEs. The imagery in NDEs varies within cultures. Rick Strassman advanced the hypothesis that a massive release of the psychedelic dimethyltryptamine (DMT) from the pineal gland prior to death or near-death was the cause of the near-death experience phenomenon."

The above is a doubt-raising/faith-damaging paragraph; it could mean that all para-normal experiences are mere hallucinations projected into consciousness by the pineal gland. This is not an outrageous suggestion, based on the similarities between reports of OBE experiences, and reports of other types of drug-induced experiences. As mentioned above, the "raising of consciousness" might turn out to be nothing more than elevated oxygen consumption in the brain; after all, all the big psychedelic drug users claim that drugs "raises consciousness", and we know that the main activity of psychedelic drugs, more than anything else, is playing with the sugar supply to the brain. If this turns out to be true, then all the great yogis and soul-travelers of history will be reduced to insane DMT trippers.

Even the validity of the NDE subjects witnessing their our team of doctors is called into question by this DMT idea, because one of the typical features of the  psychedelic experience is an experience of consciousness leaving the body for parts unknown. Perhaps a chemical is capable of STRETCHING the cord of consciousness out of the body's immediate confines, but when the body truly dies, and all the SUBTLE traces of energy have drained out, dead is just dead, and oblivion is our eternal home, not Heaven.

However, here enter the idea of consciousness levels: one of the main reasons that people take drugs is that drugs allow the subject to effortlessly change consciousness levels. The danger with drugs, of course, is that they are unpredictable; they can sometimes drive the consciousness upward into higher vibrational states (an uncontrolled state, but a higher state to be sure), but they are just as liable to drag the subject down into lower vibrational states, which is not exactly the same thing as being in touch with the oversoul. Nevertheless, the idea that the pineal gland can trigger a reaction similar to LSD is not a comfortable one.

Still, one of the big questions the scientists still can't answer is how brain-dead subjects can see their doctors and their surroundings when there are no vital signs registering at all? It raises the question of whether out-of-body drug experiences are just hallucinations or are they more? I mean, are they just random false pictures, projected onto the screen of verbal consciousness, or are actually trans-dimensional experiences? And note the similarity of the drugged state to the child-like Saturday-morning cartoons mind state, in which colors are exaggerated, and basic human principles are argued in basic terms: white hat, black hat. Surely it is not too much to imagine that ALL children, up to a certain age, dwell in a primitive heaven. Their descent into the world of paradoxical verbal images is their Fall from the Garden. They spend the rest of their lives trying to get back.


My particular lapse of faith has a brand name: it is DEATH ANXIETY.

Back to Wikipedia:

"Death anxiety is the morbid, abnormal or persistent fear of one's own death or the process of his/her dying. One definition of death anxiety is a "feeling of dread, apprehension or solicitude (anxiety) when one thinks of the process of dying, or ceasing to ‘be’".
    Types
Robert Langs distinguishes three types of death anxiety. the third one is:
Existential death anxiety
Existential death anxiety is the basic knowledge and awareness that natural life must end. It is said that existential death anxiety directly correlates to language; that is, language has created the basis for this type of death anxiety through communicative and behavioral changes."

[Sidebar: remember the sermons that discussed the opinions of Julian Jaynes, and his idea that consciousness is a consequence of language.

Does this mean that: when we make music, speaking in a language more decidedly complex that verbal communication, we enter a higher level of consciousness? Indeed, music is just like sleep; it is a place where the mobile mind consciousness elevates itself to the level of the "preconscious", or the "archetypal", or "collective" stage; and we know that beyond all these is a state of consciousness which is even larger in scope than the collective--a level of consciousness which is more inclusive, and more primary. How, then, can the reality or the PERMANENCY of dream consciousness be doubted?

To thicken the plot, listen to this quote of Wittgenstein, the leading linguistic psychologist of the 20th century:

"Wittgenstein, in a notably non-theological interpretation of eternal life, writes in the Tractatus that, "If we take eternity to mean not infinite temporal duration but timelessness, then eternal life belongs to those who live in the present."

The point is that even a master linguistic psychologist like Wittgenstein must eventually resort to faith as a substitute for verbal consciousness.]

Having suggested several scenarios for activity along the consciousness continuum, let us now examine the concept of the trinity for clues as to how we may deepen our identification with the Father.

This simple sentence from Wikipedia inspired a personally significant insight:

"Hinduism propounds that every living being, be it a human or animal, has a body and a soul (consciousness) and the bridge between the two is the mind (a mixture of both)."

We have spoken many times of Jesus as the mediator between God and man, but I don't think I ever before equated the MIND with the MEDIATOR. This does a lot to allay my death anxiety, because:

    I know my mind is just a chattering monkey, that hardly ever has anything to say; and
    I know there is a consciousness BEHIND the mind that is the true self.

I have affirmed, many times, that an increased sensitivity to spiritual activity will reveal the consciousness BEHIND the literal consciousness--and yet I don't think I ever quite went the distance so far as to discredit my conscious mind's claim on my true identity; I may have SAID it, but I don't think I really FELT it. This is what I'm saying: all these things are clear to my mind, but my heart is still unruly and untrained. Even with all this talk of the Cloud of Unknowing, I don't think I fully realized the extent of the conscious mind's power to restrict my highest sensitivities by enslaving them in verbal terms. Let's put it another way: I have not been HYPOCRITICAL in my message of the power of faith to dispel doubt, but I have NOT been STEADFAST; to be sure, in the absence of steadfast faith, Satan has been able to infect me with death anxiety. What a jerk! Him to do it, and me to fall for it!

So, a summary of the main source of my death anxiety amounts to this:

    if it is possible to LOSE CONSCIOUSNESS during sleep,
    why should it not be possible to lose consciousness        
    FOREVER?

Very frightening. But what if that subtle consciousness, BEHIND verbal consciousness, is the true consciousness? What if it depends on my mind merely to give it voice, but is just as content with silence? At this point in my life, the idea of "just shutting up for awhile and silently BEING" is an idea that is not at all upsetting to me; in fact it sounds kind of good.

And here is my point: having full knowledge of the existence of my higher self, I have, anyhow, forgotten to place the proper emphasis on THAT dimension of myself; in so doing, I have identified too much with my verbally conscious self, and have hence, bought into an image of myself that is both false and incomplete, or perhaps I should say, "false in its incompleteness". This imbalance in attention has inspired a troublesome bout of death-anxiety, but, true to the predictions of Kierkegaard, this doubt has also inspired a deeper faith, and forged this higher-level conclusion into existence. I am relieved. I am absolutely convinced in my mind and my body that my death will not be the end of me, and this knowledge encourages me to focus even more on the dimension of myself that WILL NOT DIE.

Below is an account of an Indian cheater of death:

"Ramalinga Adigal's disappearance on January 30, 1874
An Indian saint known as Vallalar claimed to have achieved immortality before disappearing forever from a locked room in 1874.

Perhaps one of the most notable factors of this sage is the claim that he supposedly attained a divinization of the physical body. He attained a total of 3 transformations. His first transformation was the transformation of his normal human body into the Perfect Body, between the supposed attributes of this body are total invulnerability to everything thus rendering him effectively immortal and impervious to any kind of damage as well as having the attributes of being omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient this body is apparently made of Divine Light.

Beyond this state there was a subsequent transformation by which the Perfect Body transformed further into the Grace Body possessing the following attributes: This body have automatically a young appearance like that of a kid, can be seen but can't be touched, and has complete and absolute dominion over all the Siddhis.

Even beyond the State of the Grace Body supposedly there was a third and final transformation in which the Grace Body was transformed into the Bliss Body. This body is the body of the Supreme Godhead and is automatically omnipresent but can't be perceived by anyone."

[Sidebar: I've read lots of New Age material laden with terms like Astral body, Etheric body, Fine body, all different flavors of body; this quotation here talks about the division of consciousness into those various levels expressed in interestingly different language. I'll read it again:

"Even beyond the State of the Grace Body supposedly there was a third and final transformation in which the Grace Body was transformed into the Bliss Body. This body is the body of the Supreme Godhead and is automatically omnipresent but can't be perceived by anyone."

Going on:

"By achieving this Ramalinga demonstrated that the ultimate states of spirituality can in fact be attained in this world with the physical body and death is not a necessity to experience the ultimate spiritual experience.

Ramalinga raised the flag of Brotherhood on his one room residence Siddhi Valakam in Mettukuppam on October 22. He gave his last and most famous lecture, entreating his audience to undertake a spiritual quest and look into the "nature of the powers that lie beyond us and move us," and asking them to meditate on the lighted lamp from his room, which he placed outside.

Adigal on January 30, 1874, entered the room and locked himself and told his followers not to open it. He said that even if they did open it they would find nothing (United with Nature & ruling the actions of 'all of the alls' - as told in his poem called 'Gnana Sariyai'). His seclusion spurred many rumors, and the Government finally forced the doors open in May. The room was empty, with no clues."

On the the subject of death and the resurrection of the body, John Polkinghorne, a physicist and a priest, has put it this way:

"'God will download our software onto his hardware until the time he gives us new hardware to run the software again for ourselves.' That gets to two things nicely: that the period after death (the Intermediate state) is a period when we are in God's presence but not active in our own bodies, and also that the more important transformation will be when we are again embodied and administering Christ's kingdom." This kingdom will consist of Heaven and Earth "joined together in a new creation", he said."

This is from the Seventh Day Adventists:

"Seventh-day Adventists believe that only God has immortality, and when a person dies, death is a state of unconscious sleep until the resurrection. They base this belief on biblical texts such as Ecclesiastes 9:5 which states

"the dead know nothing",

and 1 Thessalonians 4:13–18 which contains a description of the dead being raised from the grave at the second coming.
"And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." (cf. Gen 2:7)

Above I have asked, "Where does sleep fit into a comprehensive spiritual discipline?" Another New Age Site says this:

"During normal sleep, every human being wanders in the internal worlds with their consciousness asleep. During normal sleep, the Soul, enveloped by its Astral Body, abandons the physical body. This is how the Ethereal Body is able to repair the dense physical body.

We awaken from our natural sleep when the Soul enters into the physical body. In the internal worlds, the Souls are occupied repeating their same daily chores; there, they buy and sell as in the physical world.

During normal sleep, the Souls of the living and the Souls of the dead coexist together. In the internal worlds, we see everything as in the physical world, i.e. the same sun, the same clouds, the same houses of the city: everything looks the same.
Now, our Gnostic disciples will understand why the souls of the dead do not accept that they are physically dead. Likewise, our disciples will comprehend why the Souls of the living buy and sell, work, etc., during their normal sleep.

By consciously projecting ourselves in the Astral Body, we can know about the mysteries of life and death, since every human being is unconsciously projected in the Astral Body during normal sleep. Therefore, if we awaken the consciousness during normal sleep, then we can know about the great mysteries of life and death."

We have all read things like this, and some of us have been repelled by the "mumbo-jumbo" factor in it; and yet, it cannot be denied that the above paragraph is yet another testament to the idea of LEVELS of consciousness, and yet another suggestion that human consciousness may cross many boundaries. Furthermore, another detail in the paragraph above mentions WORK; the idea is that work of some spiritual nature is continually being done in sleep, in dreams, and even in death. A significant point is that the work of the soul is continuous, it is already in process when we enter the body, and the efforts of the soul to improve itself continue after death. This is one of the things that makes the thought of non-existence so frightening (that you would not be able to finish your work), but also one of the things that makes the thought of eternal existence so inviting-- the work goes on because, this way, we will always be assured of having something to do.

Only one thing remains to be said, concerning the role of spiritual mediation and its progress from articulate verbalization, to the grammarless Cloud of Unknowing: the primal source of this language of mediation is the Incarnation of the Christ. Jesus is the living example, the living paradigm of the mind. Through Jesus, the consciousness of the Father and the consciousness of the body are linked in sacred and eternal union. Through Jesus we realize the limitations of the literal mind, so miniscule in scope, and through Jesus we can learn to turn it off, and still have a sense of self.  To me, a sense of self is all I need to rest assured that I will remain conscious after death.

And remember, Jesus is the personification of this Consciousness thing. When we become one with Jesus, we become one with the dimension of ourselves which is, not of the highest vibratory level, but of a quality which is necessary to make us human. Jesus and the body are aligned in the spiritual hierarchy; they clearly go together as the primary definition of our humanity, and, by implication, of a much higher state of consciousness; a level that is inaccessible to our normal state of verbal consciousness.


I have become convinced that I already have direct knowledge of the soul that will live on after my physical death, and I have been able to put it into language that my literal mind can understand. So it may readily be seen that doubt can be turned into faith by using the linguistic abilities of the mind to link itself with the voiceless eternal mind. The language is difficult, but it is sweet on the tongue.

Let us pray: Jesus thank you for the power to overcome mental obstacles with divinely inspired truths conveyed to us in sleep, in dreams, and in death. Amen

1 Advent

1 Advent

Advent--a time of preparation. I think it has taken me this long--62 years--to come to appreciate these little seasonal reminders the church has given us, to help us remain mindful. Each season seems to carry a unique message, and all these individual seasonal messages add up to a yearly calendar that helps us keep sharp our sensitivities to things it might be easy to start taking for granted--a remindful calendar-- a remember to pay attention calendar.

The time of preparation dramatizes the ritual of birth and death that is played out every single day, and reminds us to be ready. The Christ may come at any time, but we must be ready.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:

"Advent is a season observed in many Western Christian churches as a time of expectant waiting and preparation for the celebration of the Nativity of Jesus at Christmas. The term is an anglicized version of the Latin word adventus, meaning "coming".

Advent is the beginning of the Western liturgical year and commences on Advent Sunday. The Eastern churches' equivalent of Advent is called the Nativity Fast, but it differs in both length and observances and does not begin the church year, which starts instead on September 1. At least in the Roman Catholic, Anglican, Lutheran, Moravian, Presbyterian and Methodist calendars, Advent starts on the fourth Sunday before December 25, which is the Sunday between November 27 and December 3 inclusive.

Latin adventus is the translation of the Greek word parousia, commonly used to refer to the Second Coming of Christ. For Christians, the season of Advent anticipates the coming of Christ from two different perspectives. The season offers the opportunity to share in the ancient longing for the coming of the Messiah, and to be alert for his Second Coming."

What follows is a little list of things to remember in Advent written by Martin Luther:

 HOMILY II: THE COMING OF THE KING.
FIRST SUNDAY IN ADVENT. (FROM THE GOSPEL.)


"Behold, thy King cometh unto thee, meek," Matt. xxi. 5.

"THIS is a prophecy of the Advent of Our Lord Jesus Christ, about which there are three signs. First, the dignity of Him Who is coming; secondly, the utility of His Advent; thirdly, the manner in which He came. Of the first sign we read in the Gospel, "Thy King cometh;" a merciful King; a just King; a wise King; a terrible King; an omnipotent King; an eternal King. A merciful King in sparing; a just in judging; a good in rewarding; a wise in governing; an omnipotent King in defending the good; a terrible King in punishing the evil; an eternal King in ruling eternally, and in bestowing immortality.

Of the first, Isa. xvi. 5:
"And in mercy shall the throne be established."  

Of the second, Isa. xxxiv.:
"And behold, a King shall reign in justice;"  

Isa. xvi. 5:
"And He shall sit upon it in truth in the tabernacle of David."  

Of the third, Ps. Ixxiii. 1:
"Truly God, is good to Israel, even to such as are of a clean heart."  

Of the fourth, Jer. xxiii. 5:
"I will raise unto David a righteous branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute justice and judgment in the earth."  

Of the fifth, Esth. xiii. 9:
"Lord, Lord, the King Almighty, for the whole world is in Thy power."  

Of the seventh, Jer. x. 10:
" But the Lord is the true God, He is the living God and an everlasting King ;"  

S. Luke i. 33:
" And of His Kingdom there shall be no end."  

Of the seven, collectively, 2 Macc. i. 24:
"O Lord, Lord, God, Creator of all things,
Who art fearful, and strong, and righteous, and merciful, and the only gracious King."

Wisdom in the Creator, mercy in the pitiful, goodness in the good, justice in the just, severity in the terrible, power in the powerful, eternity in the eternal. This is the King Who cometh to thee for thy profit. Here the use of the Advent is noted, for it was seven-fold as applied to the present time: First, for the illumination of the world; second, for the spoliation of Hades; third, for the reparation of Heaven; fourth, for the destruction of sin ; fifth, for the vanquishment of the devil; sixth, for the reconciliation of man with God; seventh, for the beatification of man.

The Son of God did not want to be seen and found in heaven. Therefore he descended from heaven into this humility and came to us in our flesh, laid himself into the womb of his mother and into the manger and went on to the cross. This was the ladder that he placed on earth so that we might ascend to God on it. This is the way you must take. If you depart from this way and try to speculate about the glory of the Divine Majesty—without this ladder—you will invent marvelous matters that transcend your horizon, but you will do so at very great harm to yourself."

Now, something I really enjoy, in giving these sermons, is reading great poetry aloud. The great poets, like the great saints, grapple with spiritual problems and give us comfort of a different sort than the scriptures, although it is like the scriptures, in that it tells the truth. Here are four truth -bearing poems:


Who has not found the Heaven - below -
Will fail of it above -
For Angels rent the House next ours,
Wherever we remove –"

John Donne (1572-1631):

"Annunciation



Salvation to all that will is nigh;
 

That All, which always is all everywhere,
 

Which cannot sin, and yet all sins must bear,
 

Which cannot die, yet cannot choose but die,
 

Lo, faithful virgin, yields Himself to lie 


In prison, in thy womb; and though He there
 

Can take no sin, nor thou give, yet He will wear,
 

Taken from thence, flesh, which death's force may try. 


Ere by the spheres time was created, thou
 

Wast in His mind, who is thy Son and Brother;
 

Whom thou conceivst, conceived; yea thou art now
 

Thy Maker's maker, and thy Father's mother;
 

Thou hast light in dark, and shutst in little room,
 

Immensity cloistered in thy dear womb.

 George MacDonald:

   Advent

"Come, saviour of nations wild, 


Of the maiden owned the child
 

That may wonder all the earth
 

God should grant it such a birth. 

Not of man's flesh or man's blood
 

Only of the Spirit of God 


Is God's Word a man become,
 

And blooms the fruit of woman's womb. 

Maiden, she was found with child, 


Nor was chastity defiled;
 

Many a virtue from her shone:
 

God was there upon his throne.
From that chamber of content,
 

Royal palace pure, he went;
 

God by kind, in human grace 


Forth he comes to run his race.
From the Father came his road,
 

And returns again to God;
 

Unto hell it did go down,
 

Up then to the Father's throne. 

Thou, the Father's form express, 


Get thee victory in the flesh,
 

That thy godlike power in us
 

Make sick flesh victorious.
Shines thy manger bright and fair;
 

Sets the night a new star there: 


Darkness thence must keep away; 


Faith dwells ever in the day. 

Honour unto God be done;
 

Honour to his only son;
 

Honour to the Holy Ghost,
 

Now, and ever, ending not. 

Amen."
 

Emily Dickinson’s Poem #1309 (on the Paradox of Advent):

"The Infinite a sudden Guest


Has been assumed to be –


But how can that stupendous come


Which never went away?

Heaven is so far of the

Mind
That were the

Mind dissolved -
The Site - of it - by Architect


Could not again be proved -

‘Tis vast - as our Capacity -


As fair - as our idea -


To Him of adequate desire


No further ’tis, than Here -

The Journey of the Magi was written by T.S Eliot in 1927. Many interpret this poem as a reflection of Eliot’s own journey from agnosticism to Christian faith.

"A cold coming we had of it,
 

Just the worst time of the year
 

For the journey, and such a long journey:
 

The ways deep and the weather sharp,
 

The very dead of winter.’
 

And the camels galled, sore-footed, refractory,
 

Lying down in the melting snow.
 

There were times we regretted 

The summer palaces on slopes, the terraces,
 

And the silken girls bringing sherbet.
 

Then the camel men cursing and grumbling
 

And running away, and wanting their liquor and women,
 

And the night-fires going out, and the lack of shelters,
 

And the cities hostile and the towns unfriendly 


And the villages dirty and charging high prices: 


A hard time we had of it. 

At the end we preferred to travel all night,
 

Sleeping in snatches,
 

With the voices singing in our ears, saying 


That this was all folly.
 

Then at dawn we came down to a temperate valley,
 

Wet, below the snow line, smelling of vegetation;
 

With a running stream and a water-mill beating the darkness,
 

And three trees on the low sky,
 

And an old white horse galloped away in the meadow. 

Then we came to a tavern with vine-leaves over the lintel,
 

Six hands at an open door dicing for pieces of silver,
 

And feet kicking the empty wine-skins,
 

But there was no information, and so we continued
 

And arrived at evening, not a moment too soon 


Finding the place; it was (you may say) satisfactory
 

All this was a long time ago, I remember,
 

And I would do it again, but set down
 

This set down
 

This: were we led all that way for
 

Birth or Death?
 

There was a Birth, certainly,
 

We had evidence and no doubt. 


I had seen birth and death, 


But had thought they were different; this 

Birth was
Hard and bitter agony for us, like
 

Death, our death,
 

We returned to our places, these Kingdoms,
 

But no longer at ease here, in the old dispensation,
 

With an alien people clutching their gods. 


I should be glad of another death."
- T.S. Eliot



Rainer Maria Rilke:
Annunciation to Mary
"The angel’s entrance (you must realize)
was not what made her frightened. The surprise 


he gave her by his coming was no more
than sun or moon-beam stirring on the floor
would give another, — she had long since grown 


used to the form that angels wear, descending;
never imaging this coming-down
was hard for them. 

(O it’s past comprehending,
how pure she was. 

Did not one day, a hind
that rested in a wood, watchfully staring,
 

feel her deep influence, and did it not
 conceive the unicorn, then, without pairing, 


the pure beast, beast which light begot, — )
 

No, not to see him enter, but to find 


the youthful angel’s countenance inclined
 

so near to her; that when he looked, and she
looked up at him, their looks so merged in 

one
the world outside grew vacant, 

suddenly,
and all things being seen, endured and done
 

were crowded into them: just she and he
eye and its pasture, visions and its view,
 

here at the point and at this point alone:-
see, this arouses fear. 

Such fear both knew."

The following are two short but meaningful quotes, and a longer piece from Dietrich Bonhoeffer. From his God Is in the Manger: Reflections on Advent and Christmas:

“God can make a new beginning with people whenever God pleases, but not people with God. Therefore, people cannot make a new beginning at all; they can only pray for one. Where people are on their own and live by their own devices, there is only the old, the past.”  


“A prison cell, in which one waits, hopes - and is completely dependent on the fact that the door of freedom has to be opened from the outside, is not a bad picture of Advent” 


The Coming of Jesus into Our Midst
Dietrich Bonhoeffer

"Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me. Revelation 3:20
When early Christianity spoke of the return of the Lord Jesus, they thought of a great day of judgment. Even though this thought may appear to us to be so unlike Christmas, it is original Christianity and to be taken extremely seriously. When we hear Jesus knocking, our conscience first of all pricks us: Are we rightly prepared? Is our heart capable of becoming God's dwelling place? Thus Advent becomes a time of self-examination. "Put the desires of your heart in order, O human beings!" (Valentin Thilo), as the old song sings. 

"Our whole life is an Advent, a time of waiting for the ultimate, for the time when there will be a new heaven and a new earth, when all people will be brothers and sisters."

It is very remarkable that we face the thought that God is coming so calmly, whereas previously peoples trembled at the day of God, whereas the world fell into trembling when Jesus Christ walked over the earth. That is why we find it so strange when we see the marks of God in the world so often together with the marks of human suffering, with the marks of the cross on Golgotha.

We have become so accustomed to the idea of divine love and of God's coming at Christmas that we no longer feel the shiver of fear that God's coming should arouse in us. We are indifferent to the message, taking only the pleasant and agreeable out of it and forgetting the serious aspect, that the God of the world draws near to the people of our little earth and lays claim to us. The coming of God is truly not only glad tidings, but first of all frightening news for everyone who has a conscience."

[Sidebar: There is an interesting ramification of the idea of FEARING Christmas; it is that Christmas, like all second comings, comes like a thief in the night, and inevitably catches us unawares, and unprepared. Christmas is a reminder to remind ourselves that human life is a serious business that requires serious people to PAY ATTENTION. KEEP YOUR LAMPS LIT.

Back to Bonhoeffer:]

"Only when we have felt the terror of the matter, can we recognize the incomparable kindness. God comes into the very midst of evil and of death, and judges the evil in us and in the world. And by judging us, God cleanses and sanctifies us, comes to us with grace and love. God makes us happy as only children can be happy.

God wants to always be with us, wherever we may be - in our sin, in our suffering and death. We are no longer alone; God is with us. We are no longer homeless; a bit of the eternal home itself has moved unto us. Therefore we adults can rejoice deeply within our hearts under the Christmas tree, perhaps much more than the children are able. We know that God's goodness will once again draw near. We think of all of God's goodness that came our way last year and sense something of this marvelous home. Jesus comes in judgment and grace: "Behold I stand at the door!  Open wide the gates!" (Ps. 24:7)

One day, at the last judgment, he will separate the sheep and the goats and will say to those on his right: "Come, you blessed. I was hungry and you fed me." (Matt. 25:34). To the astonished question of when and where, he answered: "What you did to the least of these, you have done to me?" (Matt. 25:40).

With that we are faced with the shocking reality: Jesus stands at the door and knocks, in complete reality. He asks you for help in the form of a beggar, in the form of a ruined human being in torn clothing. He confronts you in every person that you meet. Christ walks on the earth as your neighbor as long as there are people. He walks on the earth as the one through whom God calls you, speaks to you and makes his demands. That is the greatest seriousness and the greatest blessedness of the Advent message. Christ stands at the door. He lives in the form of the person in our midst. Will you keep the door locked or open it to him?

Christ is still knocking. It is not yet Christmas. But it is also not the great final Advent, the final coming of Christ. Through all the Advents of our life that we celebrate goes the longing for the final Advent, where it says: "Behold, I make all things new" (Rev. 21:5).

Advent is a time of waiting. Our whole life, however, is Advent - that is, a time of waiting for the ultimate, for the time when there will be a new heaven and a new earth, when all people are brothers and sisters and one rejoices in the words of the angels: "On earth peace to those on whom God's favor rests." Learn to wait, because he has promised to come. "I stand at the door?" We however call to him: "Yes, come soon, Lord Jesus!" Amen."

[Sidebar: Even if a person makes it the disciplined purpose of his life, to remain fluid and open to the subtle influences spirit has on mundane existence, there will still naturally be moments of  greater intensity, like a planet orbiting closer to the sun may feel the greater heat. Christmas is the season of lights because the seasonal darkness, by contrast, brings out the light of spirit more brilliantly.

What follows is a statement by James Joyce followed by commentary by Joseph Campbell; together they make a nice reminder that the Christ is everywhere and in all of us:


From James Joyce's Ulysses:



" ... Are you a god or a doggone clod? If the second advent came to Coney Island are we ready? Florry Christ, Stephen Christ, Zoe Christ, Bloom Christ, Kitty Christ, Lynch Christ, it's up to you to sense that cosmic force. Have we cold feet about the cosmos? No. Be on the side of the angels. Be a prism. You have that something within, the higher self. You can rub shoulders with a Jesus, a Gautama, an Ingersoll. Are you all in this vibration? I say you are ... " 

And Campbell's commentary:

"Joyce (I believe) says we are all in this vibration. The miracle of the Incarnation is the Magnificat of each one of us: Florry Christ, Stephen Christ, Zoe Christ, and so on—we are all particles of the Christ. Very frequently, you know, Joyce brings out key thoughts in a totally contrary kind of language and situation. So his essential message here—and this is the Gnostic message—is that the face of God is the face before you: your friend, a stranger, or whomever."

The great find of this week's meditations on Advent comes from, you guessed it, Rudolf Steiner:

Now we revisit Rudolf Steiner's insight into the 
The True Second Coming - by Robert S. Mason

"

"Another tremendous revelation from Steiner's spiritual science concerns the true nature of the Second Coming of Christ. Steiner was adamant that the physical incarnation of Christ can happen once and only once.
"Just as a pair of scales can have only one balancing-point, so in Earth evolution the event of Golgatha can take place only once".

The amazing fact is that the Second Coming is happening now, but that most of mankind is unaware of it. Actually, the term "second coming" is not in the New Testament; the Greek word is parousia, meaning roughly "active presence". It was this "presence" that Saul/Paul experienced on the road to Damascus; Paul being mankind's "premature birth" of the coming new experience of Christ.

Parousia was translated into Latin as adventus, which means arrival, thus helping to give rise to the expectation of a physical arrival of Christ. The original Greek term seems in consonance with Steiner's explanation. In fact, it is the driving force behind the "apocalyptic" convulsions and struggles of our time.

For, as the picture is given in the Apocalypse of John, the bottomless pit is opened, Michael casts the dragon and his hosts onto the earth, the vials of wrath are poured out, and Babylon is overthrown -- all in preparation for Christ's triumph that brings the New Heaven and New Earth. Most of us are unaware of this present Second Coming because it is not happening in the visible, material world, but in the "ethereal" region of the earth. "Ethereal" means the system of "formative forces", bordering on the physical, that raise inert matter to the realm of the living. . .

[ . . . the Second Coming shall be a tremendous event, not limited to a particular location:

"For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so also shall the coming of the Son of man be."
(Matt. 24:27)

The ethereal is super-physical, not bound by the laws of material space; Christ's appearance in the ethereal earth is everywhere-at-once. And since the ethereal is super-physical, some degree of super-physical vision, or "clairvoyance", is needed to see into it."

Notice that Steiner places great emphasis on developing clairvoyance, not as some rarely discovered miracle, but as the stock-in-trade for the devotee on the spiritual path. He encourages us to develop "super-physical vision"--it's just one more way of paying attention.

Moreover, contrary to some of the comments I have quoted above, Steiner is telling us that Christmas is not about the FIRST coming of the Christ, it is about the eternally unfolding SECOND coming of the Christ. Now, as we have admitted above, there must be moments of heightened intensity in the rhythm of life, but it must also be admitted that the theme song of Christmas has always been, "Live in the spirit of Christmas all the year long." Perhaps the realization, waiting for us at Christmastime, is that, with each passing year, our own personal capacity for love and virtuous acts is expanding like the eternally unfolding SECOND coming of the Christ.

Let us pray:
Jesus we fear your coming, as we fear all great and terrible things. But let us embrace our fear, as a virgin wife embraces her husband for the first time, and push onward to the light. Amen

20 Life After Death

20 Life After Death

Last week we concluded that there is life after death—end of story. So, today’s sermon examines not so much the veracity of the Life-After-Death scenario, as some of the various possible descriptions of the Life-After-Death scenario. Last week’s sermon suggested that the question of life after death was just one more rational concept in the complicated jig-saw puzzle of concepts which the mundane mind incorporates to arrive at its rational articulation of the experience of spirituality; it was suggested that the picture, of what the afterlife will look like, is slightly different for everybody, implying, therefore, that the role the afterlife concept plays in our total faith/doubt package, and its effect on our behaviors and values in this life, will also be, on a case by case basis, correspondingly distinct.

As usual, we will use Wikipedia to kick off the discussion:

‪Afterlife‬
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:

"In philosophy, religion, mythology, and fiction, the afterlife (also referred to as life after death or the Hereafter) is the concept of a realm, or the realm itself (whether physical or transcendental), in which an essential part of an individual's identity or consciousness continues to reside after the death of the body in the individual's lifetime. According to various ideas of the afterlife, the essential aspect of the individual that lives on after death may be some partial element, or the entire soul, of an individual, which carries with it and confers personal identity. Belief in an afterlife, which may be naturalistic or supernatural, is in contrast to the belief in oblivion after death.

Some belief systems, such as those in the Abrahamic tradition, hold that the dead go to a specific plane of existence after death, as determined by a god, gods, or other divine judgment, based on their actions or beliefs during life. In contrast, in systems of reincarnation, such as those in the Dharmic tradition, the nature of the continued existence is determined directly by the actions of the individual in the ended life, rather than through the decision of another being.

Christianity
Mainstream Christianity professes belief in the Nicene Creed, and English versions of the Nicene Creed in current use include the phrase: "We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come."

When questioned by the Sadducees about the resurrection of the dead (in a context relating to who one's spouse would be if one had been married several times in life), Jesus said that marriage will be irrelevant after the resurrection as the resurrected will be (at least in this respect) like the angels in heaven.

Judaism
Olam Ha-Ba: The Afterlife
• Judaism believes in an afterlife but has little dogma about it
• The Jewish afterlife is called Olam Ha-Ba (The World to Come)
• Resurrection and reincarnation are within the range of traditional Jewish belief
• Temporary (but not eternal) punishment after death is within traditional belief

She'ol
Writing that would later be incorporated into the Hebrew Bible names Sheol as the place of the dead. The Christian writer's traditional re-interpretation is that the Hebrew word Sheol can mean many things, including "grave", "resort", "place of waiting" and "place of healing".

Islam
48. What does Islam teach about life after death?
It teaches that a human being not only has a body, but also has a 'spirit' given to him or her by God. The spirit is the seed from which a higher form of life grows within man, higher than physical life, just as the body has developed from a small 'seed'. Just as in the world around us, higher forms of life evolve from lower ones, similarly from the life of the individual in this world is evolved his higher 'spiritual' life. During his life, man's deeds shape and mould his spirit, for better or worse, according to his deeds. When a person dies, the physical body is finished, but the spirit remains, as he or she had moulded it by their deeds when alive. That is the life after death."

Now the first thing I want to ask is, “Where do all these assertions about an afterlife come from?” Clearly, the vast preponderance of evidence comes from anecdotal reportage: other people have told us about the afterlife, by going there and coming back; even some us have “been there and come back”, and in prayer, is seems a safe bet to say that, ALL of us have, in some subtle way, “been there and come back”. But how can we be sure about any of these reports or experiences if “coming back” means, “not being dead?” How can we be sure that our memories of spiritual experiences are not mere hallucinations, and when we are REALLY dead, we are REALLY DEAD? We can begin with a materialist explanation of the so-called Near-Death-Experience, and see if that makes us nervous:

Has science explained life after death?
by Josh Clark

"As many as 18 percent of people brought back from death after a heart attack said they'd had a NDE. While many religious adherents might not be surprised by these accounts, the idea that human consciousness and the body exist distinctly from each other flies in the face of science. A brain-dead person should not be able to form new memories -- he shouldn't have any consciousness at all, really. So how can anything but a metaphysical explanation cover NDEs?

A study from the University of Kentucky has quickly gained ground among scientists as possibly the best explanation for NDEs. Researchers there theorize that the mysterious phenomenon is really an instance of the sleep disorder rapid eye movement (REM) intrusion. In this disorder, a person's mind can wake up before his body, and hallucinations and the feeling of being physically detached from his body can occur.

The Kentucky researchers believe that NDEs are actually REM intrusions triggered in the brain by traumatic events like cardiac arrest. If this is true, then this means the experiences of some people following near-death are confusion from suddenly and unexpectedly entering a dream-like state.

This theory helps explain what has always been a tantalizing aspect of the mystery of NDEs: how people can experience sights and sounds after confirmed brain death. The area where REM intrusion is triggered is found in the brain stem -- the region that controls the most basic functions of the body -- and it can operate virtually independent from the higher brain. So, even after the higher regions of the brain are dead, the brain stem can conceivably continue to function, and REM intrusion could still occur.

The Temporal Parietal Junction and OBEs
While the REM intrusion theory for near-death experiences explains the apparent hallucinations that accompany NDEs, another aspect remains a mystery. How can a person watch his body after he dies? Though out-of-body experiences are sometimes reported as part of the near-death experience, they can also stand alone, indicating that they are a different animal than NDEs.

This is supported by a bit of accidental research. To find the cause of a 43-year-old epileptic patient's seizures, Swiss neurologist Dr. Olaf Blanke conducted a brain mapping test using electrodes planted on the brain to determine which area controls what function. As one region was being stimulated, the woman had a sudden out-of-body experience. She told Blanke that she could see herself from above.
Blanke determined that by electrically stimulating the woman's angular gyrus, a part of the temporal parietal junction, he could induce her OBEs. What's remarkable is that the patient experienced an OBE each time her angular gyrus was arbitrarily stimulated.

Both Blanke's and the University of Kentucky theories explain OBEs and NDEs. But what about when you put the two together as an explanation for experiences like that of Pam Reynolds? This still does not resolve how Pam Reynolds and others like her view themselves outside of their bodies while they were brain-dead."

[Sidebar: I don’t want to get too far ahead of myself, but I want to reiterate this last sentence: “This still does not resolve how Pam Reynolds and others like her view themselves outside of their bodies while they were brain-dead.” Many out-of-body reports include the spiritual vision of the “dead person” not only as ABOVE the body, but sometimes, in the next room or, indeed, the next county. If a theory were devised to explain this, on the basis of the above arguments, it would have to assert that the eyes of the BRAIN STEM are mobile, itinerant, and peripatetic.

Going on:]

"NDEs may be a result of REM intrusion, triggered in the brain stem. But OBEs are controlled by a region of the higher brain, which is clinically dead when NDEs occur. What's more, it seems logical to believe that the higher brain must still function in order to interpret the sensations produced by the REM intrusion triggered in the brain stem.

Even though combining the University of Kentucky and Blanke theories does not produce an explanation for NDEs, it does not mean that either theory is wrong. Research in one area often leads to a breakthrough in another. Perhaps we will find out that an organic function is indeed behind NDEs.

If neurology does come up with the definitive explanation for NDEs, the mystery may still remain. Science could explain the "how," while leaving the "why" unanswered. Discovering an explanation for NDEs may reveal a door to the metaphysical world, which could possibly be unlocked -- and explored -- by science."

[Sidebar: Well, duh.]

"As physician Dr. Melvin Morse wrote, "Simply because religious experiences are brain-based does not automatically lessen or demean their spiritual significance. Indeed, the findings of neurological substrates to religious experiences can be argued to provide evidence for their objective reality”."

[Sidebar: In other words, the fact that scientists can yank the chain of the soul and make it do certain predictable tricks, like any other organ, muscle, or material substance, does NOT mean that there IS no transcendent soul, that there is no discrete spiritual entity, separate from the body, but  connected to the body in, if not a MYSTERIOUS way, certainly a COMPLICATED way. Scientists should not be so proud of their electrodes and brain map in creating OBE’s because Hindu yogis have been able to duplicate these effects WITHOUT wiring, for thousands of years; these abilities in the adepts have been shown to PROVE the existence of the souls, not disprove it.

Furthermore, scientists should not so quickly conclude, from the holes is their conclusions, that their scientific methods or procedures are somehow flawed—they should look for unexplainable phenomena with the eyes of pure reason, pure thought, and conclude what any thinking man must conclude—that the world of thought is real and , so far, beyond the range of our electronic instruments’ detection capabilities.]

The following piece reviews some of your basic fundamentalist truisms, which, though clichéd, deserve a place in this discussion:

10 Reasons to Believe In Life After Death

"While some believe it’s impossible to know whether there is life after death, belief in immortality is a timeless phenomenon. From the pyramids of the Egyptians to the reincarnation of New Age thinking, people of all times and places in history have believed that the human soul survives death. If there is no consciousness or laughter or regret beyond the grave, then life has fooled almost everyone from the Pharaohs of Egypt to Jesus of Nazareth.

An Eternal God
The Bible names God as the source of immortality. It describes His nature as eternal. The same Scriptures tell us that God created us in His likeness, and that His plan is to welcome His children eventually into His eternal home. The Scriptures also teach that God introduced death into human experience when our first ancestors trespassed into the darkness of forbidden territory (Genesis 3:1-19). The implication is that if God allowed the human race to live forever in a rebellious condition, we would have unending opportunity to develop into proud, self-centered creatures. Instead, God began to unfold a plan that would ultimately result in the eternal homecoming of all who chose to be at peace with Him (Psalms 90:1; John 14:1-3)."
 

[Sidebar: I believe this sentence, “The implication is that if God allowed the human race to live forever in a rebellious condition, we would have unending opportunity to develop into proud, self-centered creatures,” suggests many powerful ramifications:

1.   What about the relationship between death and original sin, for instance: if Man, once infected by the fruit of the tree of knowledge, were allowed to retain the knowledge both of good and evil, AND of the power to defy the law of God, eternity might easily find itself peopled by a race of Satanic ego maniacs. Breaking the cycle of growth in rational knowledge by introducing death into the system, sounds kind of like breaking a tension cycle in a violinist’s technique—relaxing the grip of tensed muscles, allowing the position to begin again. Without death, original sin might grow, unimpeded, into a universe- engulfing cancer; and without life after death, Man, created in God’s image, could not enjoy the return to his source in the Heart of God.

2.   Another implication is that, living in the shadow of death serves as a constant reminder that life resonates beyond the confines of carnal knowledge. The mystery of death sobers the proud and calms the furious.

Back to 10 Reasons:]

"Practical Effects
Belief in life after death is a source of personal security, optimism, and spiritual betterment (1 John 3:2). Nothing offers more courage than the confidence that there is a better life for those who use the present to prepare for eternity. Belief in the unlimited opportunities of eternity has enabled many to make the ultimate sacrifice of their own life in behalf of those they love. It was His belief in life after death that enabled Jesus to say, “For what profit is it to a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?” (Matthew 16:26). It is the same truth that prompted Christian martyr Jim Elliot, who was killed in 1956 by the Auca Indians, to say, “He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep, to gain what he cannot lose.”

The following pair of excerpts bring a little classical philosophy to the party, and show how St. Thomas Aquinas was able to put a spiritual spin on the materialistic views of Aristotle. It seems that science and spiritualism have been at odds for 2500 years; original sin pervades the scientific perspective, and the Cloud of Unknowing envelopes the act of  Faith:

Plato
“Plato was a dualist, meaning that he believed that humans are composed of two elements, body and soul; two separate entities; a corporeal body, and an ethereal soul. The ‘soul’ is simply a function of the body. Plato held that the soul was tripartite; composed of three elements in much the same way as a chariot. At the helm is the soul’s logical element, commanding the two horses- base desire, and emotional drive. When reason is in control, and coordinates the horses, life is smooth and good. When the horses are unruly, and logic is thrown aside, life becomes stressful and full of strife.

Plato held that this tripartite soul is in a constant cycle- being trapped in a human body, and then escaping the body at death to return to the ‘realm of the forms’, and back to a human body, and so on ad infinitum- as the soul is both eternal and immutable. His student Aristotle contested this viewpoint, claiming instead that soul and body were inseparable- an early materialist stance- the soul being a component of the body, helping to keep it alive and enrich it, in much the same way as blood. Descartes may have attacked Aristotle’s assertion, based on his argument from doubt- if the soul is simply a component of the body, then it’s existence can be doubted, rendering it effectively corporeal, and therefore not the metaphysical entity which Descartes believed it to be- and which, indeed, his assertion ‘Cogito Ergo Sum’ seems to prove it to be.”

St. Thomas Aquinas is known as the first of a group of philosophers known as the scholastics. Scholasticism was a movement in the medieval period to reconcile Christian dogma or doctrine with the somewhat newly discovered objective philosophies of Aristotle and Plato. Thus, we observe that: not only has the Mind/Body dichotomy been a controversial subject ever since philosophers first began to write, but the battle between religion and science has also been raging, within the Christian church, ever since 11 or 1200; this little piece by St. Thomas Aquinas is a charming introduction to this subject.

Aquinas and Life After Death

“Saint Thomas Aquinas, famous philosopher and theologian of the thirteenth century, is known for adhering to a worldview very dependent upon Aristotle’s philosophy. Though the task of reconciling Aristotle’s philosophy with Aquinas’ proved difficult, he was very thorough and well argued in it. One of the biggest problems Aquinas ran into during this attempt to make his views compatible with Aristotle was that of life after death.  Aquinas made arguments against Aristotle’s idea that the soul is mortal, among which include
the idea of concept abstraction, and
the necessity of unity between body and soul.

            Among Aquinas’ weaker arguments for the immortality of the soul is that of desire. This argument essentially states that because no human desire is in vain, the desire to live on after death will not be either. This argument does not come with great support other than the belief that God does not leave any desire unanswered.

A stronger argument comes when Aquinas alludes to concept formation. Aquinas believed that because humans are capable of thinking of ideas apart from material substances, that souls were also able to live apart from the body. For example, we can think of the Pythagorean theory as an abstract concept without seeing it being used to find the length of a hypotenuse. Therefore, the soul can live on without the body because it does not need the body to exist, just like ideas do not need material bodies to be realized."

[Sidebar: Many concepts of spiritual existence are IN FACT living spiritual entities; an idea's incarnation into the physical, by any means, gives that idea life in the exact same way our souls bestow life upon our our physical bodies; that is to say, many philosophers perceive THOUGHT itself to be an abstract reality with its own supernatural identity, structure, and sphere of influence; THINKing being the same as AMing. Is thought, itself, therefore, the essence of the soul?—or is it, as in the case of the neutrino detection, merely the evidence of where some higher supernatural identity has been?]

I have declared, for years, that music is not a representation of an abstract reality, but the living presence of an abstract reality made manifest in the physical universe. Music, as thought, rightly claims to be as much a spiritual reality as any prayer, or miraculous pre-cognition. We cannot see the wind, but we know where it has been; likewise we cannot see the soul, but without it we would see nothing, because we would be conscious of nothing.

Furthermore, music, as thought, lays as much claim to immortal being as any other emanation of soul.

Wikipedia on the Cloud of Unknowing-Anon

“The book counsels a young student to seek God, not through knowledge and intellection (faculty of the human mind), but through intense contemplation, motivated by love, and stripped of all thought. This is brought about by putting all thoughts and desires under a "cloud of forgetting", and thereby piercing God's cloud of unknowing with a "dart of longing love" from the heart. This form of contemplation is not directed by the intellect, but involves spiritual union with God through the heart:

"For He can well be loved, but he cannot be thought. By love he can be grasped and held, but by thought, neither grasped nor held. And therefore, though it may be good at times to think specifically of the kindness and excellence of God, and though this may be a light and a part of contemplation, all the same, in the work of contemplation itself, it must be cast down and covered with a cloud of forgetting. And you must step above it stoutly but deftly, with a devout and delightful stirring of love, and struggle to pierce that darkness above you; and beat on that thick cloud of unknowing with a sharp dart of longing love, and do not give up, whatever happens.""

These two paragraphs may appear to contradict the comments I have made, concerning the spiritual reality of thought, since thought, by this author, is rejected as a lower mode of consciousness; but remember I also suggested, above: many philosophers perceive THOUGHT itself to be an abstract reality with its own supernatural identity, structure, and sphere of influence; THINKing being the same as AMing. Is thought, itself, therefore, the essence of the soul?—or is it, as in the case of the neutrino detection, merely the evidence of where some higher supernatural identity has been?

The Cloud of Unknowing author subsumes all spiritual identity under the general heading of “love”. God is love, is enough for him. Would that it were enough for me.

In this presentation, we are suggesting a definition of spiritual activity as: abstract (superhuman) ideas not only being born into the physical dimension, but acting on it in certain physicalized ways. The paragraphs below on William James take this idea still further.

William James
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:

"View on Spiritualism and Associationism
James studied closely the schools of thought known as associationism and spiritualism. The view of an associationist is that each experience that one has leads to another, creating a chain of events. The association does not tie together two ideas, but rather physical objects. This association occurs on an atomic level. Small physical changes occur in the brain, which eventually form complex ideas or associations. Thoughts are formed as these complex ideas work together and lead to new experiences. Isaac Newton and David Hartley both were precursors to this school of thought, proposing such ideas as “physical vibrations in the brain, spinal cord, and nerves are the basis of all sensations, all ideas, and all motions...”

James disagreed with associationism in that he believed it to be too simple. He referred to associationism as “psychology without a soul”. Because there is nothing from within creating ideas; they just arise by associating objects with one another."

[Sidebar: As we have noted above: the fact that objective observation can document the active phenomenology of a spiritual entity, does NOT negate the possibility of a of higher dimension of existence for that spiritual reality. The thing perceived is the thing as it exists in an abstract or supernatural dimension. I think therefore I am—it doesn’t get any plainer than this.]

"On the other hand, a spiritualist believes that mental events are attributed to the soul. Whereas in associationism, ideas and behaviors are separate, in spiritualism, they are connected. Spiritualism encompasses the term innatism, which suggests that ideas cause behavior. Ideas of past behavior influence the way a person will act in the future; these ideas are all tied together by the soul. Therefore, an inner soul causes one to have a thought, which leads them to perform a behavior, and memory of past behaviors determine how one will act in the future."

[Sidebar: You can see, here, how the Aristotelean/Acquinas controversy continues to rage.]

"These two schools of thought are very different, and yet James had a strong opinion about the two. He was, by nature, a pragmatist and therefore believed that one should use whatever parts of theories make the most sense and can be proven. Therefore, he recommended breaking apart spiritualism and associationism and using the parts of them that make the most sense. James believed that each person has a soul, which exists in a spiritual universe, and leads a person to perform the behaviors they do in the physical world. James was influenced by Emmanuel Swedenborg, who first introduced him to this idea. James states that, although it does appear that humans use associations to move from one event to the next, this cannot be done without this soul tying everything together."

[Sidebar: This idea harmonizes with the Platonic idea that “At the helm is the soul’s logical element, commanding the two horses- base desire, and emotional drive.”

Back to James:]

"For, after an association has been made, it is the person who decides which part of it to focus on, and therefore determines in which direction following associations will lead. Associationism is too simple in that it does not account for decision-making of future behaviors, and memory of what worked well and what did not. Spiritualism, however, does not demonstrate actual physical representations for how associations occur. James therefore chose to combine the views of spiritualism and associationism to create his own way of thinking that he believed to make the most sense.”

The expression "to make the most sense," in this context, may be said equally to mean, "to be the most true." Sense, as a logical entity, and Truth as a spiritual entity, are harmoniously homogenized in the cloud of unknowing.

This last quotation by Gary E. Schwartz, from his William James and the Search for Scientific Evidence of Life After Death, is in the same ball park as my comments last week on the subject of neutrinos; i.e., that very small things, as yet undetectable by current science, may indeed turn out to be the MATERIAL basis of the soul AND eternal life.

Contemporary Physics, Systems Theory, and the Persistence of Information

"As described in detail in [his] book integrating systems theory and quantum physics (Schwartz and Russek, 1999), while at Yale [he] also became open to the possibility that not only did information carried by photons persist in the ‘vacuum of space’

(a core assumption of quantum physics and astrophysics—without this assumption, there would be no justification for the development and application of precision optical as well as radio telescopes),

but that this information retained its systemic / feedback structure, and therefore could continue to function theoretically applied to all systems at all levels which contained dynamical feedback loops.

In other words, just as the light from distant stars continues long after the star has ‘died’—i.e. the photonic information of the history of the star continues in space (a fact which makes the science of astrophysics possible) — patterns of photonic information and energy comprising biological systems could conceivably continue in space after the organism had died (despite the low intensity of the energy—in quantum physics, intensity is defined as the number of photons per unit period of time).

This led to the novel prediction that learning and memory processes which required the existence of networks of feedback loops could conceivably continue in space (since their informational structure would persist in the vacuum as well). Simply stated, the integration of systems theory with contemporary quantum physics revealed a possible theoretical framework for predicting and explaining a variety of seeming anomalous experiences and phenomena, including the continuity of cognitive processes after physical death.

Moreover, since animal brains contained billions of neurons with potentially a hundred or more feedback loop connections (on the average) per neuron, this raised the possibility that memories and consciousness associated with all living systems with functional nervous systems could, in principle, continue in some form after physical death."

At the beginning of this sermon, I mentioned my intention to offer a  variety of possible descriptions of the Life-After-Death scenario. I don't know whether I have done exactly that, as much as I have offered a variety of justifications for the Life-After-Death scenario. Perhaps the justification comes with a built-in description. My mind reels, at that particular suggestion. It is overwhelming to think about, merely because each anomalous soul, in this wide universe, expresses its thoughts in subtly different ways, making the possibility of coming up with some globally uniform description of the After-Life, an impossible dream. That is, unless we return to this:

The Cloud of Unknowing author subsumes all spiritual identity under the general heading of “love”. God is love, is enough for him.

Certainly, at some point, it must be enough for me--else, whatever will my death mean?

Let us pray:
Jesus, as we approach the season of Advent, and prepare to solemnize the anniversary of your incarnation at Bethlehem, we are minded of so many deaths and rebirths. Give us the strength of attention to steadfastly fix our eyes on the newness of life offered to us by you through a birth and a death. Amen.

19 Death I

19 Death I

The subject of today's sermon is death. There are many signs of death, and there are many TIMES of death. Death is a single moment of separation from earthly life, but death is also an attitude that pervades our daily lives, as a background vibration that hums in our ears from the very beginning of life. We will hear many comments, in this sermon, about life after death, but I confess that I am not that interested in that whole life-after-death scenario: we will talk about that next week.

Today, I'm not that interested in thinking about heaven. There are SO many different pictures given to us by people who have had near-death experiences, by people who soul travel, by people who channel visions, that I am sure that everybody's heaven is somewhat different; this not because existence after death is is different for everybody, but because, like on the earth plane, I'm sure there are many levels of heaven which attract birds of a feather, including some very high abstract levels, some comfortable medium levels that look kind of like Leave It To Beaver's middle America, and some hellish levels.

The world is filled with people who have a very specific idea of exactly what happens after death, and what their heaven will be like; but I don't have a good picture in mind, so it's not of interest to me even to attempt to paint one. However the moment of death, the significance of death in our daily lives, and the preparation for death is of extreme interest to me, and that is the focus of the quotes that I have assembled here to present and discuss. We begin with an assortment of Biblical  quotations including Old Testament prophetic statements, and some of New Testament comments on death.


Daniel 12:1-3-And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book. 2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.
3 And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.

Ecclesiastes 9:5 - For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.
Psalms 115:17-18 - The dead praise not the LORD, neither any that go down into silence.  

[Sidebar: Interesting expression, "The dead praise not the LORD"--does this resonate with predestination?, i.e., are the living, praising the Lord ALREADY living life eternal? Are those pre-destined for death, ALREADY dead? Can those who live outside the radiance of divine consciousness someday partake of it, or is the silence, in which they live, destined to overtake them utterly?]


Proverbs 12:28 - In the way of righteousness is life; and in the pathway thereof there is no death.

[Sidebar: One of the salient points of this sermon is that: to the righteous man there is no death, so why even talk about it?]


Luke 23:43 - And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with me in paradise.

[Sidebar: I love this: this criminal seems to be the first of Jesus' guests in His heavenly mansion. Of course, I have heard the argument that there is a misplaced comma, and the scripture really reads: "Verily I say unto thee Today, (comma) thou shalt be with me in paradise.", that is to say, SOMEDAY you will be with me in Paradise. In this timeless spiritual universe, some people will quibble about anything.]



1 Corinthians 15:26 - The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.

[Sidebar: we have heard Carlos Castaneda speak of death stalking us, as if death were our only true enemy. Perhaps facing death is the strategy by which we emasculate all of death's fearsome power to rob us of the vitality for living a righteous life.]

1 Corinthians 15:42-44
So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.

[Sidebar: we will hear this idea reiterated many times in the next few minutes.]


1 Corinthians 15:51 - Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,

2 Corinthians 5:8 - We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord. 

Revelation 14:13
Then I heard a voice from heaven say, "Write: Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on." "Yes," says the Spirit, "they will rest from their labor, for their deeds will follow them."

[Sidebar: Again, we are told that our deeds will follow us into eternity. Is this not an argument in favor of the interpretation of here and now as an eternal moment? because: if our deeds follow us into eternity, they must have partaken of eternity all along!]

Now we have a group of quotations from various historical figures on the subject of death. There are several poetic romanticizations of death, but I have chosen many others that point to a moral imperative suggested by death:

---Mark Twain
"Death is the starlit strip between the companionship of yesterday and the reunion of tomorrow."
 

― Edgar Allan Poe, The Pit and the Pendulum
“In death - no! even in the grave all is not lost. Else there is no immortality for man. Arousing from the most profound slumbers, we break the gossamer web of some dream. Yet in a second afterward, (so frail may that web have been) we remember not that we have dreamed.” 


[Sidebar: Many philosophers have referred to this earthly life as the dream, and to the awakening into the spiritual life as the reality. In a timeless universe, must we, ought we, or even CAN we, tell the difference?]

― Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, A Psalm of Life
“Life is real! Life is earnest!
 

And the grave is not its goal;
 

Dust thou are, to dust thou returnest, 

Was not spoken of the soul.” 


Kahlil Gibran
On Death
"Then Almitra spoke, saying, "We would ask now of Death." 
And he said: 
You would know the secret of death. 
But how shall you find it unless you seek it in the heart of life?
The owl whose night-bound eyes are blind unto the day cannot unveil the mystery of light. 
If you would indeed behold the spirit of death, open your heart wide unto the body of life. 
For life and death are one, even as the river and the sea are one.
In the depth of your hopes and desires lies your silent knowledge of the beyond; 
And like seeds dreaming beneath the snow your heart dreams of spring. 
Trust the dreams, for in them is hidden the gate to eternity. 
Your fear of death is but the trembling of the shepherd when he stands before the king whose hand is to be laid upon him in honour. 
Is the sheered not joyful beneath his trembling, that he shall wear the mark of the king? 
Yet is he not more mindful of his trembling? 
For what is it to die but to stand naked in the wind and to melt into the sun? 
And what is to cease breathing, but to free the breath from its restless tides, that it may rise and expand and seek God unencumbered? 
Only when you drink form the river of silence shall you indeed sing. 
And when you have reached the mountain top, then you shall begin to climb. 
And when the earth shall claim your limbs, then shall you truly dance."

[Sidebar: Again and again we hear, life and death are one, life and death are one! Is this a truism, or the actual truth?  The C.S. Lewis and Castaneda quotes below suggest the opposite--that life and death are NOT one, and that it is precisely the not-lifeness of death that endows it with such tremendous significance.]

― C. S. Lewis
"It is hard to have patience with people who say "There is no death" or "Death doesn't matter." There is death. And whatever is matters. And whatever happens has consequences, and the consequences of death are irrevocable and irreversible. You might as well say that birth doesn't matter."

― Carlos Castaneda, Journey to Ixtlan
“Death is the only wise advisor that we have. Whenever you feel, as you always do, that everything is going wrong and you're about to be annihilated, turn to your death and ask if that is so. Your death will tell you that you're wrong; that nothing really matters outside its touch. Your death will tell you, 'I haven't touched you yet.”

[Sidebar: The following extensive quotes from C.G. Jung touch on several important issues. not the least of which is the question of "belief".]

---C. G. Jung:
"I have often been asked what I believe about death, that unproblematical ending of individual existence. Death is known to us simply as the end. It is the period, often placed before the close of the sentence and followed only by memories of aftereffects in others. For the person concerned, however, the sand has run out of the glass; the rolling stone has come to rest. When death confronts us, life always seems like a downward flow or like a clock that has been wound up and whose eventual “running down” is taken for granted. We are never more convinced of this “running down” than when a human life comes to its end before our eyes, and the question of the meaning and worth of life never becomes more urgent or more agonizing than when we see the final breath leave a body which a moment before was living.

How different does the meaning of life seem to us when we see a young person striving for distant goals and shaping the future, and compare this with an incurable invalid, or with an old man who is sinking reluctantly and without strength to resist into the grave! Youth — we should like to think — has purpose, future, meaning, and value, whereas the coming to an end is only a meaningless cessation. If a young man is afraid of the world, of life and the future, then everyone finds it regrettable, senseless, neurotic; he is considered a cowardly shirker.

But when an aging person secretly shudders and is even mortally afraid at the thought that his reasonable expectation of life now amounts to only so many years, then we are painfully reminded of certain feelings within our own breast; we look away and turn the conversation to some other topic. The optimism with which we judge the young man fails us here. Naturally we have on hand for every eventuality one or two suitable banalities about life which we occasionally hand out to the other fellow, such as “everyone must die sometime,” “one doesn’t live forever,” etc. But when one is alone and it is night and so dark and still that one hears nothing and sees nothing but the thoughts which add and subtract the years, and the long row of disagreeable facts which remorselessly indicate how far the hand of the clock has moved forward, and the slow, irresistible approach of the wall of darkness which will eventually engulf everything you love, possess, wish, strive, and hope for — then all our profundities about life slink off to some undiscoverable hiding place, and fear envelops the sleepless one like a smothering blanket. . . . ."

[Sidebar: HOWEVER:]

"There are these peculiar faculties of the psyche that are not entirely confined to space and time. You can have dreams or visions of the future … only ignorance will deny these facts…These facts show that the psyche, in part at least, is not dependent upon these confinements. Then what? When the psyche is not under that obligation to live in time and space, alone, and obviously it doesn't, then, to that extent, the psyche is not subject to those rules; and that means a practical continuation of life, of a sort of psychical existence beyond time and space.

Belief is a difficult thing for me--I don't believe--I must have a reason for a certain hypothesis, if I know a thing; and if I know it, I don't need to believe it. But when there are certain reasons for accepting certain hypothesis, I shall accept it naturally.

For, seen in correct psychological perspective, death is not an end but a goal, and life's inclination towards death begins as soon as the meridian is past."

[Continuing, on the subject of belief, Rudolf Steiner makes this contribution:]

---Rudolf Steiner: Metamorphoses of the Soul, Vol 1: Lecture 6: Asceticism and Illness – Berlin, 11th November 1909:

"We must not assume that everything which looks like blind faith is so. For example, we are told that in the old Pythagorean Mystery Schools  there was a familiar phrase: The Master has said. But this never meant: The Master has said, therefore we believe it! For his students it meant something like this: The Master has said; therefore it demands that we should reflect on it and see how far we can get with it if we bring all our forces to bear upon it. To “believe” need not always imply a blind belief springing from a desire for self-annihilation. It need not be blind belief if you accept communications springing from spiritual research because you trust the researcher. You may have learnt that his statements are in strictly logical form, and that in other realms, where his utterances can be tested, he is logical and does not talk nonsense. On this verifiable ground the student can hold a well-founded belief that the speaker, when he is talking about things not yet known to the student, has an equally sure basis for his statements."

[Below, Joseph Campbell poo-poos the whole idea of life after death (although, elsewhere, I have heard him speak affirmatively on the subject). The point here, once again, is that an overly intense interest in death can only compromise the intensity with which we live our lives, and an overly hysterical fear of death negates the whole acceptance of the eternal moment that we may enjoy in the here and now.]

Joseph Campbell
"I think the idea of life after death is a bad idea. It distracts you from appreciating the uniqueness of the here and now, the moment at which you are living. For example, if you think that when you die, your parents will be there and you'll live with them forever, you may no longer appreciate the significant moments that you share with them on earth.
Every moment is unique and will not be continued in eternity. This fact gives life its poignancy and should concentrate your attention on what you are experiencing now. I think that that is washed out a bit by the notion that everyone will be happy in heaven. You had better be happy here and now. You'd better experience the eternal here and now.....
If you concretize the symbol of heaven, the whole situation disintegrates. You think for example, that eternity is there and your life is here. You believe that God, the source of energy, is there and you are here and that he may come into your life or he may not. No No - that source of eternal energy is here - in you - now"

[I'm not sure if the following Aldous Huxley quote has any point to it, but it is definitely funny:]

---Aldous Huxley
"A belief in hell, and the knowledge that every ambition is doomed to frustration at the hands of a skeleton, have never prevented the majority of human beings from behaving as though death were no more than an unfounded rumor."

The following article proposes some realistic strategies for dealing with the prospect of death in the here and now:

Steve Pavlina.com
LIFE AFTER DEATH
What can we reasonably say does NOT happen after death?
Obviously what's "reasonable" will differ a bit from person to person based on his/her context and beliefs, but I think most of us can agree on some fairly basic observations.
First, you can't take it with you. All your physical stuff stays here. Whenever someone dies, we notice that their stuff remains in the physical world. It doesn't suddenly vanish.
Another thing we notice is that our physical bodies stay here. That includes our heart, lungs, brain, hemp tattoos, etc. 

Also, it's fair to say that because the physical stuff stays here, then any knowledge and skills you've developed which are rooted in the physical world will become obsolete when you die. Your knowledge of HTML probably won't be of much use in the afterlife, unless of course there are dead computers in the afterlife too, such as my old Atari 800. I hope you still know BASIC. 

If we can take anything with us after death, then, it would have to be something non-physical in nature. And the non-physical part of ourselves is our consciousness. You can call it other names if you wish -- soul, spirit, etc. The exact term you use doesn't really matter. I'll use the term consciousness.

So we have a couple alternatives that seem reasonable to me:

1.    After we die we retain some part of our consciousness, but all the physical parts of our existence are lost.

[Sidebar: We really need to think about the scope of the word "physical" here. Our senses are able to detect certain frequencies of light, color, and sound, certain levels of pressure, and certain intensities of smell; but it is well-understood (from evidence provided by our huge arsenal of electronic gadgets) that there are frequencies of light that we cannot see, frequencies of sound that only dogs can hear, etc. If we can discern such fine gradations of matter in a photon, why is it so far-fetched to suggest that the soul, though invisible to our eyes, is still not, in some sense, a PHYSICAL entity?

Consider the neutrino, as described in Wikipedia:

"A neutrino (/nuːˈtriːnoʊ/ or /njuːˈtriːnoʊ/) is an electrically neutral, weakly interacting elementary subatomic particle with half-integer spin. The neutrino (meaning "small neutral one" in Italian) is denoted by the Greek letter ν (nu). All evidence suggests that neutrinos have mass but that their mass is tiny even by the standards of subatomic particles. Their mass has never been measured accurately.
Neutrinos do not carry electric charge, which means that they are not affected by the electromagnetic forces that act on charged particles such as electrons and protons. Neutrinos are affected only by the weak sub-atomic force, of much shorter range than electromagnetism, and gravity, which is relatively weak on the subatomic scale. Therefore a typical neutrino passes through normal matter unimpeded."

[Therefore a typical neutrino passes through normal matter unimpeded.]

"Neutrinos are created as a result of certain types of radioactive decay, or nuclear reactions such as those that take place in the Sun, in nuclear reactors, or when cosmic rays hit atoms. There are three types, or "flavors", of neutrinos: electron neutrinos, muon neutrinos and tau neutrinos. Each type is associated with an antiparticle, called an "antineutrino", which also has neutral electric charge and half-integer spin. Whether or not the neutrino and its corresponding antineutrino are identical particles has not yet been resolved, even though the antineutrino has an opposite chirality to the neutrino.
Most neutrinos passing through the Earth emanate from the Sun. About 65 billion (6.5×1010) solar neutrinos per second pass through every square centimeter perpendicular to the direction of the Sun in the region of the Earth.

In 1942 Wang Ganchang first proposed the use of beta-capture to experimentally detect neutrinos. In the 20 July 1956 issue of Science, Clyde Cowan, Frederick Reines, F. B. Harrison, H. W. Kruse, and A. D. McGuire published confirmation that they had detected the neutrino, a result that was rewarded almost forty years later with the 1995 Nobel Prize.
In this experiment, now known as the Cowan–Reines neutrino experiment, antineutrinos created in a nuclear reactor by beta decay reacted with protons producing neutrons and positrons:
ν
e + p+ → n0 + e+
The positron quickly finds an electron, and they annihilate each other. The two resulting gamma rays (γ) are detectable. The neutron can be detected by its capture on an appropriate nucleus, releasing a gamma ray. The coincidence of both events – positron annihilation and neutron capture – gives a unique signature of an antineutrino interaction."

The bottom line concerning neutrinos is that we cannot see them, we can just see where they have been. It's a lot like faith. It's also a lot like ghosts.

If science can detect and manipulate a particle as invisible as a neutrino, what might it someday accomplish on the frontier of spiritual reality? I am not suggesting that spirituality is merely or ONLY a finer grade of physical reality--no, I am convinced that spiritual entities like the will and consciousness exist in a completely other, higher, abstract dimension of existence-- I AM suggesting that there are gradations along a continuum of interlocking dimensions about the scope of which we still have not the slightest clue.

Back to Pavlina:]

"So we have a couple alternatives that seem reasonable to me:

1.    After we die we retain some part of our consciousness, but all the physical parts of our existence are lost.
2.    After we die we cease to exist. Our consciousness gets wiped out along with the physical. Dead and gone forever.

Life After Death
I can think of many other options which are variations on these two. You can twist and reword these basic ideas into different forms, and you can speculate endlessly about what it would be like to experience option 1 (such as a precursor to reincarnation), but I think this is what death basically boils down to. Either we continue to exist in some non-physical state of consciousness, or we don't. 

Now which one of these general options is most likely true and correct?
Certainly we can unearth pieces of evidence that may favor one side or the other. We can look externally and examine things like near-death experiences and those who claim to channel dead people and so on. We can look to ancient texts and other people (living or dead) for guidance. Or we can look within ourselves and attempt to intuit the truth.
Personally I've done plenty of both looking within and looking without, and so far it hasn't really given me a satisfying answer. I found enough evidence to partially convince me that option 1 is more likely correct than option 2, but there are still a number of holes that leave me with doubt. Given what I know about beliefs, I always have to wonder to what degree I may be finding what I expect to find at any given time.
This uncertainty about death presents a serious problem though. In order to live my life in a manner I feel is intelligent, I'd really prefer a clear answer here. If I know that option 1 is correct, (after we die we retain some part of our consciousness) I'm going to live my life very differently than if I know option 2 is correct (after we die we cease to exist). I can't do both at the same time because they seem incompatible. I'd set different goals on one side vs. the other. 

Living in a state of uncertainty doesn't quite work either. Uncertainty in this particular area gives me a poor basis for making intelligent lifelong decisions. It's fine that I'm uncertain about what the weather will be like next week. But uncertainty about death itself makes long-term planning nearly impossible unless I lower my consciousness, watch a lot of TV, and subscribe to the social context without thinking for myself. Think about it -- if you knew with absolute and total certainty what will happen to you after death, would it change how you're living your life today?

[Sidebar: Faith and the Cloud of Unknowing enter the picture at this point. This author goes on to say (in a certain sense) that the certainty of faith is a necessary component in a healthy, positive attitude toward death; and this is the point that we are wending toward: the mind's attention is more powerful than any other force in the universe when it comes to creating reality.]

"Remaining uncertain in this area is a suboptimal choice -- it's better to decide one way or the other and be wrong than it is to remain uncertain and do nothing. Too much doubt in this area will produce the worst outcome of all. In order to intelligently decide how to live, we need to have a reasonable understanding of where we're headed. We can still live OK without this certainty, but we couldn't really say that we're living intelligently, since we'd have no basis for knowing if our decisions would ultimately turn out to be smart or foolish in the long run. . . . 

I think the main reason I found it so difficult to understand the possibilities beyond death is that I was coming at it from the wrong perspective. I was trying to understand certainty from the perspective of doubt and skepticism. And that turned out to be a mistake because doubt cannot create certainty -- it can only perpetuate doubt."

[Sidebar: We have spoken elsewhere of the purpose and benefits of doubt, so it would be easy to get into a quarrel with that last sentence—but, for now we will let it go, because this next argument is extremely clever, and justifies cutting the guy some slack:]

"So I had to change my perspective to experience these options from the inside looking out. I considered the perspective of option 1 (after we die we retain some part of our consciousness)  looking at option 2 (after we die we cease to exist) and vice versa. So I put myself into a state of certainty looking at another state of certainty. As another analogy, you'll gain more information by looking at Catholicism from the perspective of atheism (and vice versa) than you will by looking at both of them from the perspective of agnosticism. Those side views are the key to discovering what is true for your consciousness."

[Sidebar: I find this argument extremely imaginative, and pregnant with potent possibilities. Identifying with an argument is the next best thing to BEING the argument--and from the perspective of BEING, all doubts are dispelled; this is a proper definition of faith: living within the confines of a proposition such that, regardless of all external realities, the inner reality is true. "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." Voila! Instant faith!]

"Ultimately, I realized that the simple truth here was that of free will. Once I understood the perspectives of both options 1 and 2, I had all the information I needed to make a choice. But it wasn't really a choice between which option was provably correct from an external point of view. None of the options were externally provable because consciousness is not subject to the scientific method. Consciousness works on an entirely different level. So at this level, the real "truth" was to apply my own free will to decide what I wanted to be true for me... what I wanted to make a part of my own consciousness. Did I want to choose to live in accordance with option 1 or option 2? There was no externally right or wrong answer. It was simply a matter of choice.

[Sidebar: Is it really true that there is no right or wrong answer? Is not the simple matter of choice rather the simple matter of accepting who you are, and allowing predestination to fill in the blanks? By that I mean, this author is offering to subject his attention to the machinations of the Cloud of Unknowing, and we know that within that cloud all paradoxes are resolved, and the simple truth sets us free. The choice is not between right and wrong, it is between faith and reason.]

"So I chose option 1, the branch which suggests that conscious action and growth continue even after death. And part of the reason I chose this to be my own truth was that I realized that it's the most intelligent choice I can make no matter what the reality of death turns out to be. Even if we all go to oblivion when we die, it's still the most intelligent choice to live with the belief that we are immortal conscious beings. That belief will actually yield a more intelligently lived life, one that is dedicated to the greatest good of all. It will promote and enhance the survival of all humans. Where the scientific method fails, choice must fill in the gap. And that choice can be either certainty or doubt. But in order to understand this great choice, we must experience both the certainty and the doubt to know what we're really choosing.

[Sidebar: recall my previous comments on the virtue of doubt. This sentence, "we must experience both the certainty and the doubt to know what we're really choosing", is practically word for word what C. S. Lewis AND Kierkegaard said; as I recall, the sense was that the DOUBT is necessary to make the FAITH real.]

"It is entirely up to us to choose a life of greatness or to choose a life of nothingness. I think this is what Helen Keller meant by the quote, "Life is either a daring adventure, or nothing." It is our personal choice that makes it so. Choose doubt and get nothing. Choose certainty and greatness results.
To sum it all up for you, here's why holding the development of your own consciousness as your highest priority in life makes sense:
1.    Developing your consciousness will give you the tools to understand life and death much better, which will help you decide how to live as intelligently as possible.
2.    Developing your consciousness will help you escape pain and create tremendous pleasure for yourself, so if you ultimately go to oblivion, at least you'll fully enjoy your life along the way. It will also help you transcend the fear of death.
3.    If you die and find yourself frozen in a certain state of consciousness, it probably won't be so bad because you'll have developed your consciousness as much as possible while you lived. You'll have done the best you can to prepare for this possibility.

[Sidebar: This is, of course, the same as the Hindu philosophy, and the direction of Jesus to "pray unceasingly".]

4.    If you die and find that you're able to continue developing your consciousness after death, then your human existence will have given you a great head start. And if I get there first, you'll immediately be able to subscribe to the feed for "Personal Development for Dead People," and we'll continue growing together as spirits in the ether. Won't that be fun?
5.    Developing your consciousness will ultimately cause you to live in such a manner that raises the awareness of other people around you, helping to transform the world into a better place for everyone. So this is in fact the best way to live if you wish to be of service to all of humanity."

[Sidebar: Raising the consciousness of people around you would not necessarily be a "service to all of humanity" if there is no life after death, but we can let that go.]

"For these and other reasons, I believe the most intelligent thing we can do with our human lives is to pursue the development of our own consciousness. Now perhaps we can't take our consciousness with us either, but at the very least, it's the only thing that even has the potential to continue with us after death. . . . 

My highest priorities as a human being are rooted in what I feel is permanent. If I'm able to continue on after I die, my to-do list would essentially remain the same. I would only need to change the form of the most important items but not the intention behind them. Whether I'm dead or alive, my purpose remains the same: to grow and to help others grow in consciousness. Only the manner in which that purpose manifests would change. To me the service of the highest good is to devote my life to the service of consciousness itself, regardless of whether I exist as a physical or an etheric being.
To me this is the highest degree of personal productivity -- to adopt a context for living that even makes sense from the perspective of beyond the grave, to live here on earth as a timeless being instead of a mortal one. How many of your current goals and dreams seem shallow and lifeless when viewed from this perspective? Do you live for what is permanent or for what is ephemeral? Is your human existence devoted to the servicing of dust or the realization of destiny?

I like this piece quite a bit; in spite of the the author's sometimes weak powers of reasoning, he still manages to express some crucial arguments in support of spiritual reality, in a quasi-scientific language. Next week we will hear more of this kind of thing going all the way back to Plato, and up to David Bohm.

In the meantime, let us remind ourselves that our character is largely a by-product of the attitudes we bring to the table of reason when all things spiritual are under discussion. Death may be a final reality for some, but to the the devotee on the spiritual path, it is just one more idea we must incorporate into out attention on the infinitude of God.

Let us pray: Jesus, thank you for your invitation to join you in a place of many mansions. Let us see heaven with enlightened eyes, and let the centerpiece of all our horizons be your loving face. Amen