ESCHOTOLOGY
The author of this article : c.bastin b.com.,
The author of this article : c.bastin b.com.,
Date: 30.1.11
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
“Living come from the death, just as the dead come from the living” – says Plato. Existence of the soul after death is an unsolvable problem to the religions and the philosophers. Because, no one knows that what will happen after our death. No one can experience this. This is the mystery of the world. Many seekers searched for finding out what will happen to the soul after our death and whether the soul will survive or not. They could not give any scientific proofs for the survival of the soul after the death.
The notion of life after death came from the prehistoric civilizations. Some philosophers claim that these beliefs are the foundation for the origin of religions. Herbert Spencer (1820 – 1903) says, “Re-animation explains the concern of the primitive peoples with the preservation of the body after death, and gives rise to such burial practices as embalming and the provision of food, implements, and clothing for the deceased. When it became clear that the dead never come back to life, man concluded that the ghost must inhabit another world, and only then did the concept of a soul come in to being. Belief in souls is consequently later than belief in ghosts. The ancestral spirits were believed to live in a world separate from, but similar to, that of the living. When man became more sophisticated about natural events, and asked for their causes, the ancestral spirit world became the logical choice for a reasonable explanation. In this manner, sprits became important to man, since they can control life and death as well as bring sickness and health, abundance and poverty. The ghosts become gods, and they are feared. Their human needs and vanities, they can be influenced by offerings, sacrifices, flattery and propitiation. Thus the demand arises for specialist in the art of ritual: medicine men priests, who themselves often assume supernatural properties.”[1]
The notion of life after death was very ancient. The ancient people believed in the survival of the soul after death. For example, Neanderthal men (1,50,000 – 70,000B.C.) believed in the survival of the soul after death. There is ample evidence that they often carefully and deliberately buried their dead. “Neanderthal burials often include the careful placement of tools and animal bones, indicating that the bodies of the deceased may have received ritual treatment. Some times only the skull was preserved. Neanderthal burial was found in a cave near La Ferrasie, also in France. A man and woman were found buried side by side; near by the remains of the two children were discovered, and under a tiny mound those of a baby. In front of the graves of the children there lay the deposit of the bones and ashes.”[2] These burials make it clear that the Neanderthallers believed in the survival of the soul after death. Another example for ancient belief was found in Mesopotamia. “In Mesopotamia, in the early literate society, the royal graves at Ur (C.2500B.C.) indicate that a royal person attended in death by a retinue of servants, who were killed at the time of the burial. No doubt, the dead high born person was expected to enjoy in the life beyond the same life-style to which he had been accustomed in his earthly existence.”[3] Some times the survivors spend time, money and effort to keep the souls of the deceased as happy as possible in their other- worldly existence, so that they might have no desire to return to earth.
The purpose of this dissertation is to throw some lights on the various beliefs in eschatology. This dissertation tries to find out the reality of the life after death through the modern evidences so as to enhance the understanding of the eschatology. This dissertation is the descriptive study of eschatology. It makes an attempt to highlight the concept of eschatology by dividing the study into four chapters. The first chapter deals with the understanding of the life after death by the various religions. The second chapter enumerates the philosophers’ view on the life after death. The third chapter deals with the materialistic view of life after death. The fourth chapter objectively evaluates the same problem by authenticating it with the modern scientific evidences.
The research on this nature would not be easy to write without recourse to original sources. This research has done with the available books in the library. The researcher has quoted directly or indirectly from various authors wishes to acknowledge with grateful thanks his indebtedness. The available primary sources are: ‘Comparative Religions’: K.N. Tiwari, Motilal Banar Sidass Publishers Pvt. Ltd., Delhi; ‘Contemporary Indian Philosophy’: Basant Kumar Lal, Motilal Banar Sidass Publishers Pvt. Ltd., Delhi; ‘Philosophy of Life and Death’: M.V. Kamath, Jaico Publishing House, Mumbai. Other books consulted are detailed in the bibliography to all of whom thanks are hereby offered.
CHAPTER I
RELIGIOUS UNDERSTANDING OF THE LIFE AFTER DEATH
Introduction
There are two fundamentally different types of views on the after life 1) empirical views based on observations 2) religious views based on faith. The empirical views based on observations, which made by humans or instruments. These observations are made from research, near death experiences and out of body experiences. The religious views based on faith. Ancestors or faith in religious book like the bible the Quran, the Vedas etcetera, extracts these from stories that are told. This chapter mainly focuses on the religious views on the life after death.
1.1Hinduism
Hindu eschatology consists of the transmigration of souls from one body to another. Hinduism believes that the life of the man does not end with his physical death. The soul will remain after the death of our physical body. The body is a shell; the soul inside is immutable and indestructible. It takes on different lives in a cycle of birth and death. They claim that the end of this cycle is attaining Moksha or salvation. Hinduism had faith that the soul after death of present body has to enter into some other new body in accordance with its past deeds. It transmigrates from the old body to a new body. It has to be reborn. Sri. Ramana Maharshi says, “The self existed before the birth of this body and will remain after the death of this body. So it is with the series of bodies taken up in succession. The self is immortal. The phenomena are changeful and appear mortal. The fear of death is of the body”[4]. So death is not the end of life but it is an instrument, which helps to reincarnate the self-entering into another life. The idea of rebirth is based on the idea of Karma. According to Hinduism the basic concept of Karma is “as you sow, you shall reap”. So if we have lived a good life on the earth, we will be rewarded in the after life. Like that, the bad actions will be mirrored in the future life. Karmas generate Samskaras, which force the soul to be born again and again. Only Niskama Karma (action done with out attachment) does not generate any Samskara. Therefore the performer of this stage has not to take rebirth. He attains Moksha.
1.1.1 The Vedas (c.1500)
The Vedas speaks about the idea of heaven and hell. The Vedas believes that after death the sprit of man is sent to heaven or hell depends on their good and bad action done by him on the earth. Much is spoken of heaven and its pleasure rather than the miseries of the hell. The Vedas figures out the heaven, as there are soft, cool breezes, refreshing water, streams of milk etc. Every thing seems to be plenty. The Brahmanas pointed out that man’s deeds are weighted in a balance and people are rewarded or punished in accordance with their good and bad deeds on the earth. The righteous is separated from the unrighteous in the presence of Yama (the king of the land of the death). Rig Veda explains about various births as follows:
“I behold that the soul
Who is master of all the senses?
And possesses in exhaustible energy and strength
Enters into various births”.[5] (Rig Veda 1-164-31)
1.1.2 The Upanishads (9-5 B.C)
The doctrine of the rebirth clearly described in the Brahadaranyaka Upanishad. It distinguished three classes of soul. The first kinds of souls are librated from the round of the birth. The soul purified by the fire that has consumed its gross body passes on into the flame. The spiritual person will go to the world of Brahman from whom there is no return. The second kind of soul passes into smoke, the night, the world of fathers and finally into the moon. There it becomes food for gods, when it passes away from them; it descends into space, from space into the air, from the air into the rain and the rain onto the earth. But those who do not know these two ways become worms, moths and biting serpents.[6]
1.1.3 The Bhagavad-Gita (5-1)
The Bhagavad-Gita, which consists of teachings of the lord Krishna, says the cycle of the births and death as follows:
1) “Just as a person casts off. Worn-out garments and puts on others that are new, even so does the embodied souls cast off worn-out bodies and take on others that are new”.[7]
2) “For that which is born death is certain, and for the dead birth is certain. Therefore grieve not over that which is unavoidable”[8]
3) “On taking such a birth
Soul again revives the divine consciousness
Of his previous life,
And endeavors to make further progress
With a view to achieve salvation”.[9] (Gita 6-43)
The Bhagavad-Gita, the lord Krishna said that our body is like old clothes. When a person died, he left his body and enters into a new body like wearing new clothes. So birth and death are certain. He emphasized that no need of worrying about death.
1.2 Zoroastrianism (c.1100-500 B.C)
Zoroastrianism is the religion, which has a unique idea of the life after death. According to Zoroastrianism man has an after life in accordance with his righteous or evil action has done in the world. One, who has done the righteous action, will find a place where he enjoys with his full freedom. Those who have done evil on the earth will go to the place where they will undergo some terrible sufferings.
Zoroastrianism believes that the soul after the physical death of man remains for three days with the body and meditate upon its deeds. On the fourth day, the soul enters into the place of judgment. The archangels (Vohuman and Mithra) keep a record of every man’s deed on the earth. Apart from heaven and hell, it also speaks about the third place called purgatory where remain the souls of good and bad deeds are more or less equal. To enter into heaven and hell the soul has to cross a bridge called ‘the Chin vat Bridge’. For those who rewarded to heaven the bridge gives an easy path to cross it over and for those who punish to go to hell the bridge becomes very hard to walk as on the edge of the sword.
The eschatology of Zoroastrianism does not end. It continues its belief that the soul will remain in the heaven or hell in accordance with their deeds on earth until the world comes to its final end. At that time Ahura Mazda will wipe out all evil from the earth and establish complete good all over the world. The souls from hell will be brought out and purified. After the purification the souls will join with the heavenly souls and a new cycle of earth will begin in which there will be no evil and no misery. All souls remain forever without growing old or facing decay.[10] In this world there will be no evil but only good.
1.3 Buddhism (563-483 B.C)
According to Buddhism after the death of the present body takes another body in accordance with their merits and demerits on the earth. Those who have done an action with out attachment have not been born again and again. They attain nirvana, a state of being purely spiritual and free from all sorts of sufferings of the physical life. There are two gains out of Nirvana. They are negative and positive. If we speak in negatively that is stopping of rebirth and future misery, positively speaking attainment of peace in the life.
Buddha said that if any actions have done without the sense of attachment, which are the causes of the rebirth. But there is no rebirth for those who have been performed an action with the sense of attachment. It is like a fried seed, which does not generate any plant.
Buddhist eschatology does not speak about the heaven and hell. They claim that the process of rebirth is a continuation of the previous life. It is like a burning flame lit up another flame before blowing out. Just as the last consciousness moment of present life gives the first consciousness moment of the next life. The process of rebirth is based on our past Karma. Ignorance is the root causes of the rebirth. According to the Buddhist perspective, the current life is the continuation of the past life. If one dies with the peaceful state of mind, will enter into a state that Buddha called Amata (deathlessness). If one dies with the negative state of mind will be born lower such as an animals, birds etc. Here there is no deity for judging good and bad action of man and rewarding or punishing him in accordance with his deeds in his present life.
1.4 Jainism (580-500 B.C)
Jainism believes that man has an immortal soul within him, which does not die after death of his physical body. The soul transmigrates into a new body after the death of his physical body. The assumption of a new body fully depends on the Karmas of the previous life. According to Jainism the soul in its real nature is pure and perfect. But due to its conduct with ajiva it accumulates karma and involved in the wheel of life. The removal of Karma is possible only when Jiva is freed from the bondage of Karma and passed beyond rebirth and attained Moksa. Jiva can attain Moksa by its voluntary efforts and not depending on any deity or God. One can attain Moksa by his own efforts.
There are Gotra-Karmas and namakarmas, which determine our family of birth, bodily conditions, and economic and social status. The bad Karma leads to subhuman birth. Any action has done with less of attachment that leads to human birth. Jainism says, “The Jiva has a characteristic of Urdhvagati (a tendency to move upwards). When the soul is free from all Karmas, it moves upward to the end of Lokakasa and remains in its pure form in Siddha Loka. It does not move further because there is a absences of the Dharma Astikaya in the Alokakasa. The efforts for the attainment of Moksa are possible only for the human beings in this Karmabhumi. The final stage of the self-realization is the stage of the absolute perfection. In this stage all bodily stages are removed. Then the soul enters into the third stage of Sukladhyana. At the end of this stage the soul attains liberation.”[11]
1.5 Judaism (1900-1700 B.C)
Jewish sacred texts and literature have little to say about what happens after death. They believe in the resurrection of the dead and a world yet to come in which all the souls will be resurrected. According to Judaism the advantage of resurrection and after life is to be had only to the righteous and the wicked are to perish forever along with their physical death. Jewish people call heaven as Gan Eden [The Garden of Eden]. It is generally described as a place of great joy and peace. Talmudic imagination of Gan Eden is as sitting at golden banquet tables or at stools of gold, enjoying lavish banquets or celebrating the Sabbath, enjoying sunshine and sexual intercourse. Hell is known as Gehinnom or Sheol. It is a place of darkness and silence. The souls in Gehinnom are punished for up to twelve months. After twelve months, their body is consumed and their soul is burned and the wind scatters them under the feet of the righteous or continues to be punished. The Torah and Talmud focus on the purpose of earthly life, which is to fulfill one’s duties to God and one’s fellow man. Those who are succeeding at this, will be rewarded by God and those who are failing at it, will be punished by God. Jewish believe the messianic age. The Hebrew word ‘Olam Ha-Ba’ (the world to come) is used for referring the messianic age. Maimonides, the great Jewish thinker, says, “An after life continues for the soul of every human being, a soul now separated from the body in which it was housed during its earthly existence”. At the time of messianic age the righteous dead will be resurrected but the wicked will not be resurrected. The messianic age will be a time of peace and merry.
1.5.1 The After life in Torah
The Torah is the sacred canonical scripture for the Jew. The Torah describes the after life in a figurative way. According to it the death means rejoining one’s ancestors. “I will gather you to your ancestors, and you shall be gathered to your grave in peace” [2King22: 20]. The other view of dead is like dust returning to dust. The author of Psalm describes the suffering of the wicked in the Sheol as follows: -
“I am counted among those who go down to the pit;
I am like those who have no help,
Like those forsaken among the dead,
Like the slain that lies in the grave,
Like those whom you remember no more,
for they are cut off from your hand.
You have put me in the depths of the pit,
in the regions dark and deep.
Your wrath lies heavy upon me,
And you overwhelm me with all your waves”.
[Psalm88: 4-7]
1.6 Christianity: (c.0-33 C.E)
Christianity believes in life after death. Christianity was founded under the faith of resurrection of Jesus Christ. Christian eschatology concerns the after life, the return of Jesus, the end of the world, resurrection of the dead, last judgment and establishment of the kingdom of God. When the world comes to its final end, all the souls will reunite with their bodies and will bring before God for the final judgment. God will separate the souls according to their good and bad deeds on the earth. Those who have done an action in accordance with the teachings of Jesus are sent to heaven and those who are unrighteous and sinful are sent to hell. Pope Benedict XII says, “The pure souls of the just, who have died, see God intuitively and face to face even before the resurrection of their bodies; and immediately after death the souls of the damned descend into hell, where they are tormented by eternal punishment”.[12]
Christianity believes in two kinds of judgments, which are the universal judgment and particular judgment. The particular judgment is the judgment immediately after his physical death. The universal judgment is the final judgment, which will make at the end of the world. It is applicable to all. After this judgment the souls will go to heaven or hell in accordance with their deeds on the earth. The fourth Latern council (1215) taught that the Lord Jesus Christ would come at the end of time to judge the living and dead. All will rise with their bodies to be rewarded or punished according to their deeds. Apart from heaven and hell Christianity also have faith in Purgatory were the souls prepare themselves for the purification and will become worthy to enter into heaven. Those who are in the purgatory can enter into heaven only by offering Mass for them, praying for their release and giving arms on their behalf. No one can help the souls in the hell because they are beyond all helps.
1.6.1 Biblical View of Eschatology
Christians have belief on life after death on the basis of biblical teachings. The bible is the mirror of their faith. The bible is divided into two that is Old Testament and New Testament. The Old Testament views of death means rejoining with one’s ancestors. “Abraham breathed his last and died in a good old age, an old man and full of years, and was gathered to his people” [Gen25: 8]. The Old Testament image of the after life is as a shadowy place called Sheol. It is a place of darkness and silence, located in low place. At the time of judgment, God will reward or punish them in according to their deeds. “Many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt” [Dan12: 2].
The New Testament believes that whoever believes Jesus Christ; they will live with him in the life after death. Jesus Christ says, “Every one who lives and believes in me will never die” [John11: 26]. According to Gospel of Matthew at the death of Jesus Christ tombs were opened, and at his resurrection many saints who had died emerged from their tombs and went into the holy city. It clearly speaks about what will happen at the time of resurrection.
According to St. Paul eternal life is the gift of God and it comes through good works and faith. He also believes that the spirit of lord gives the eternal life to those who believe him. “If the spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will give life to your mortal bodies also through his spirit that dwells in you” [Rom8: 11]. St. Paul teaches that Jesus will raise us up along with him at the time of resurrection. St. Paul argues that if the dead are not raised to a new life, then Christ was not raised from the dead.
According to St. John, those who have done right shall rise to live but those who have done evil shall rise to be damned. Death is not final for those who believe in Jesus.
1.7 Islam (c.570-632 A.D)
Islam believes that Allah gives life to every creature and also gives death to every one. Allah is a cause for all birth and death. After the death of our physical body, the spiritual body remains uncorrupted till the last day when the world comes to an end. In the middle period the soul rests in a place called Al-Berzahk. No one knows the Day of Judgment. When the day comes, it will blow by the trumpet. On that day the dead rise from their graves. Their souls reunite with their bodies and are brought before Allah by his angels and those who have done merits on the earth will be rewarded by God and will go to heaven (jannah). Those who have done demerits in their life will be punished by God and will go to hell (jahannam).
Heaven and hell are graphically pictured in the Quran. Heaven is described as a rose-bed of pleasure. Hell is described as unending suffering and pain. The Quran describes heaven and hell as follows:
1) “ And give glad tiding unto those who believe and do good works; that theirs are gardens underneath which rivers flows; as often they are regaled with food of the fruits there of they say: this is what was given us to afore-time; and it is given to them in resemblance. There for them are pure companions; these forever they abide”. (2: Al-Baqurah: 25)[13]
2) “Lo! Those who disbelieve our revelations, we shall expose them to the fire. As often as their skins are consumed we shall exchange them for fresh skins that they may taste the torment Lo! Allah is ever mighty, wise”. (4: An-Nisa: 56)[14]
After the judgment one has to pass over the bridge called ‘Alsirat’. Those who are punished to go to hell the passage of the bridge like a swords edge. They could not pass through below the hell. But for those who are awarded to go to heaven (jannah), the passage of the bridge becomes wider. They can easily cross over the bridge and reach the heavenly side.
Conclusion
All the religions of the world believe in the life after death but they differ in detailed nature. All religions commonly accept that the death is not a final end. Man has life beyond death. All the religions of Indian origin (Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism) believe that after the end of the physical life, man has to take rebirth in accordance with his deeds on the earth. Every man has got a soul within him, which does not die with the physical death and transmigrates into a fresh body after the death of the present body. Those who have attained knowledge have not to be reborn after death. They attain the spiritual status of immortality and perfection.
The eschatology of the Semitic religions is more or less same idea. On the Day of Judgment, who have done the good or bad actions on the earth and sending him to heaven or hell in accordance with his deeds? These are the same idea in the Semitic religions but the way of expression differs at some points. Jewish eschatology is vague and indefinite. The Christian and Islam eschatology are very clear. Judaism believes that the sinful have no after life. They perish completely with death. It believes in final Day of Judgment on which the whole world is brought before God. Their good and bad actions are accounted there and according to it they will send to heaven or hell. Judaism does not speak about the intermediary period, which is the period between the individual death and the final Day of Judgment. Islam and Christianity are so clear about the period also. They believe in the Day of Judgment, the resurrection of the death and the allotment of heaven and hell. According to Islam the live in the place called ‘Albarzahk’ during its intermediary period. On the Day of Judgment they all resurrected and brought before Allah. After the Day of Judgment the souls will cross the bridge called ‘Alsirat’. Those who have done good things on the earth, they can easily cross the bridge but those who have done evil deeds on the earth cannot cross over it. According to Christianity, those who have done good deeds will go to the heaven but those who have done bad action will go to hell. Those who are in the middle position, they are sent to purgatory where they have repent for their sins and will go to heaven. Zoroastrian’s eschatology is unique the other Semitic religion in two aspects. First, after the death of the physical body, the soul remains the body for three days and meditates upon their own deeds. On the fourth day, they are brought before god for the final judgment. The second, the hell is not permanent those who have done evil on the earth. The hell is a temporary place for them till Ahura Mazda will refresh the world by destroying all evils and makes it good in everywhere. After that all souls equally become the member of the same world. So, from the religious point of view, man is eternal and has the life after death.
CHAPTER II
FEW PHILOSOPHERS VIEWS ON THE LIFE AFTER DEATH
Introduction
According to Aristotle, man is a rational animal. The philosophers are those who look into the reality in the rational way. Even though, they are the philosophers, their arguments of eschatology are based on their religions in which they belong. They explain their arguments from the day-to-day life of the ordinary human beings. So that, all human beings can understands the immortality of the soul. This is an unsolvable problem to the philosophers to give the scientific proofs for the immortality of the soul. They tried their level best to prove this mystery in the rational way. There are many philosophers who speak about eschatology. But this chapter enumerates few philosophers view on the life after death.
2.1 PLATO (c.427-347 B.C)
Plato believes in the immortality of the soul. He explained the immortality of the soul in the entire dialogue of ‘Phaedo’ in which he formulated a rational understanding of the immortality of the soul. According to Plato, death is the separation of the soul from the body; but it is not the end of the soul. Plato believes in metempsychosis, which means the transmigration of the soul from the one living being to another, and in the resurrection, the rebirth of the soul in the new body. So, the life is the one of the preparation for the death. At the time of death the soul separates from the body. Plato argues that the knowledge of the importance matters of the life is clearest to the soul alone; the attachment to the mortal body is only the distraction of the soul. He believes that the soul cannot be destroyed intrinsically or extrinsically. The soul can be destroyed by an external evil. Plato says, “The just and foolish man, when he is detached, perishes through his own injustice, which is an evil of the soul”[15]. Plato was inspired by Socrates idea of proving the immortality of the soul. Plato argues as follow:
2.1.1 The cycle of opposition
This argument is based on the contraries. Every quality comes into being from its own opposite. The contraries are produced from the contraries. For example, hot comes from the cold and the cold from the hot. The hot things are just cold things that have warmed up, and the cold things are just hot things that have cooled off. The life comes from the death. Therefore out of death comes life. In his point of view, the people who are dead, they were alive but then experienced the transition we call dying, and the people who are alive, they were among the dead but then experienced the transition we call being born. Plato says, “Now it is true that the living come from the dead, then our souls exist in the other world, for it is not, how they could be born again? Are not all things, which have opposites, generated out of their opposites? I mean such things as good and evil, just and unjust-and there are innumerable other opposites which are generated out of opposites. And I want to show that in all opposites there is of necessity a similar alternation, I mean to say, for example, that anything, which becomes greater must become greater after being less… And that which becomes less must have been once greater and then have become less… Is there not opposite of life, as sleep is the opposite of waking... Is not death opposite to life?”[16]
2.1.2 The recollection argument
This argument explains that we posses some non- empirical knowledge at birth. The soul existed before the birth to carry that knowledge. If the soul existed before the body, it is natural that it will exist after the body. Our knowledge is a recollection, which we have learned that which we now recollect. It is impossible unless our soul had had been in some place before existing in the form of man.
2.1.3 Resemblance Argument
The soul has a spiritual and divine nature. All the visible things are subject to dissolution. But the soul is invisible and intangible, so it is not subject to dissolution. Plato says, “now the compound or composite may be may be supposed to be naturally capable, as of being compounded, so also of being dissolved, but that which is uncompounded, and that only, must be, if anything is, indissoluble… And the uncompounded may be assumed to be the same and unchanging, whereas the compound is always changing and never the same.”[17]
The above-mentioned arguments show that the soul does not perish after the death. When Plato speaks of immortality and indestructibility of the soul, he does not mean that every part of the soul to be immortal. But our rational part remains imperishable.
2.2. ST.THOMAS AQUINAS (1225-1274 A.D)
St. Thomas Aquinas believes in the resurrection of the body after our death and those who have risen from the death will see God face to face. He quoted the scripture in orders to strengthen his idea. “I know that my redeemer lives and that at the last he will stand upon the earth; and after my skin has been thus destroyed, then in my flesh I shall see God” (Job 19:25, 26). God is the cause of the resurrection of the bodies. St. Thomas Aquinas calls the resurrection of Christ the quasi-instrumental cause through which God will rise up our bodies. On the last day, Christ will appear in his glory and will summon all men to resurrection and judgment. The angels will gather all the resurrected soul. But angels will not do the actual reuniting of the souls and bodies, but it will be the immediate work of God himself.
The resurrection of the body will take place at the end of the world. The end of time will not be known to any one expect God. Scripture says, “But about the day and hour no one knows, neither the angel of the heaven, nor the son, but only the father” (Mat 24:36). Many people think that the resurrection of the body will take place at night when Christ arose from the dead. The resurrection of the body will take place in an instant, and not by degrees. St. Paul says, “In moment, in twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will rise imperishable, and we will be changed” (1Cor 15:52)
St. Thomas Aquinas thought that the risen body will have the development of a person thirty years old at which they arrive maturity and full development. All the risen body will not have the same size; each one will have the suitable size. The risen bodies will not eat, or drink, or sleep, or beget offspring. After the resurrection, the bodies of saints will protect from suffering substantial changes. But the body of the wicked people will go to hell where they will undergo such terrible sufferings. The glorified body will be able to move with the quickness of thought from place to place under the direction of the soul and the commands of the free will. This quality of risen body is called agility. The scripture says, “Those who wait for the Lord shall renew their strength, they shall mount up with wings like eagles, they shall run and not be weary, they shall walk and not faint” (Is 40:31). The glorified body will have a certain luminous quality, which St.Thomas calls clarity. This clarity is the result of the overflow of the soul’s glory into the body. This clarity will be visible to the non-glorified eye of damned.
Each man is judged immediately after his death. It is called particular judgment. The universal judgment is the final judgment, which will make at the end of the world. At the time of final judgment, Christ will appear among the glorified body and will judge according to their deeds on the earth. The scripture says, “For all of us will appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each may receive recompense for what has been done in the body, whether good or evil” (2 Cor 5:10). St. Thomas Aquinas believes that the final judgment will be, not by the words of mouth, but mentally.
St. Aquinas believes in limbo and purgatory. “The limbo is a place where the soul of unbaptized children remains because of their original sin. These infants are not wholly separated from God; they are united to him by their nature and its gifts. They continually rejoice in God by natural knowledge and love”.[18]
The purgatory is a place where the souls of venial sins will be punished temporally. “Purgatory is situated near hell, so that it is the same fire which torments the damned in hell and cleanses the just in purgatory”.[19] After their punishment, these souls will join the eternal bliss.
2.3 SWAMI VIVEKANANDA (1863-1902)
Literally immortality means deathlessness. The death is not the end of the soul. The soul will survive after our death. Vivekananda said that it is not possible to give an exact scientific demonstration of the soul’s immortality. But he also believes that these beliefs cannot be treated as an unscientific belief. He explains about the nature of immortality as such, “Often in the turmoil and struggle of our lives we seem to forget it, but suddenly some one dies –one, perhaps whom we loved, one near and dear to our hearts, is snatched away from us- and the struggle, the din and turmoil of the world around us cease for a moment and the soul asks the old question, “what after this?” “What becomes of the soul?”[20]
Vivekananda believes the survival of the soul after death, rebirth, and the ultimate realization of immortality of the soul and of complete freedom. He thought that rebirth is the aspect of immortality and the ultimate realization of immortality will be getting out not only of this world but also the cycle of birth and rebirth.
He explains the difference between the survivals of the soul immortality of the soul. Survival means that the death is not the end of life. He explains this through the doctrine of ignorance and Karma. He says, “the soul performs action in ignorance, certain tendencies and Samskaras are created in accordance with whish the next birth is determined.”[21] He believes that the true immortality can be attained only when this cycle is finally stopped .the immortality is a prize to be won. This can be realized only by strenuous and persistence effort. He explains the realization of immortality of the soul by taking into the account of the growth of seed and the growth of the child. “The seed grows into a tree only because the tree is already potentially contained in the seed. The child grows into an adult only because the child is potentially the adult.”[22] Like that the soul is able to realize immortality because the soul is immortal. The immortality is hidden in him, the soul is not aware of it because still it is in ignorance. The soul has to be made aware; the hidden elements of immortality have to be fully manifested. That will be the realization of immortality. He says that it is like finding the lost necklace on one’s own neck. All time man searches for it but it is there with him.
2.3.1 Evidences for the immortality of soul
Vivekananda offers certain evidences for the immortality of soul, which are as follows:
1) the most popular evidences is that the argument based on the simplicity of the soul. He says, “What is liable to destruction is invariably something composite, because the destruction means breaking the whole into its parts. The soul being simple is part less and therefore, the question of its destruction does not arise”.[23]
2) The another evidence of the immortality of the soul comes from the analysis of the power and capacities which are hidden in man. In the hours of need and emergency man is able to do any thing even which he thinks the impossible. He has the capacity to do every thing but he does not realize his inner potentiality. Man has the growth of continuous progression. This development makes us to believe that the process continuous even after death. No can imagine his own mortality. This inability of imagines our own mortality is an evidence of immortal life. Vivekananda says, “Even to imagine my own annihilation I shall have to stand by and look as a witness.”[24]
2.4 MAHATMA GANDHI (1869- 1948)
Gandhi believes in rebirth. His beliefs on rebirth are based on Hindu beliefs and tradition. Hinduism believes that the soul will remain after the death of our physical body. The body is a shell; the soul inside is immutable and indestructible. It takes on different lives in a cycle of birth and death. They claim that the end of this cycle is attaining Moksha or Salvation. Hinduism had faith that the soul after death of present body has to enter into some other new body in accordance with its past deeds. Gandhi believes all these doctrine of Hinduism but he gives a moral interpretation to this doctrine by emphasizing the ethical value of this belief. He feels that by believing in the possibility of rebirth one is able to make adjustment s with life. This belief makes man to be loving, kind, moral and benevolent even in the midst of his bitter experiences of jealously and hatred. The life is not a bed of roses. It is the mixture of struggle, hardship, suffering and happiness. If there are no such beliefs on rebirth, individual may break down all the moralities for his own sake. Because of this belief in rebirth, he realizes that this world is not the end of everything and whatever we have done on the earth, will reflect in the future life also. Evil and sufferings is not the final. This realization gives strength to man and gives courage to face all the problems in his life. Therefore he becomes a pious, moral and noble living.
His belief in rebirth is based on the belief in Karma. It is taken to be both a metaphysical and a moral law. Metaphysically speaking, this law of Karma explains births and formation of bodies. Our present life is based on our past Karmas. The law of Karma is considered as a moral law because it is also considered our good and bad actions on the earth. Gandhi says, “Every individual is unique because of his peculiar physical and mental inheritance and equipment. What an individual now ism, is the effect of his actions – his habits of thinking, feeling, speaking and acting in the past. Man makes himself through all these diverse activities, internal and external. They appear to be so insignificant separately, but taken together they create the tremendous forces that shape his health, character, and his entire destiny.”[25] The moral law of Karma is more important because it determines our future life. Man is the maker of his own destiny. An individual is going to make himself a good man or an immoral man. Gandhi thinks that this type of realization will create in man a sense of responsibility in man.
2.5 RADHAKRISHNAN (1889-1975)
Radhakrishnan believes the rebirth. The most general idea of rejection of rebirth is that there is no evidence of anybody having any memory of the past life. Radhakrishnan says, “Lack of memory about the past life is not an adequate ground for rejecting the belief in rebirth. No body has any memory of his existences in his mother’s womb, but that does not mean that that is not a state of existence. Death puts an end to the memory – capacity, but sufficient evidences of the tendencies of the past are available in life”.[26]According to him, rebirth in means survival and it is a fact. Rebirth is the essential for the realization of the different possibilities lf existence. Radhakrishnan does not take the following evidences for rebirth.
1) Everything in the universe comes out of its own past historical growth and it will further develop in future. There is continuity in these things. The selves also have their previous inherited quality in the present life. They also carry their acquired disposition in their future life. If there is continuity in each and every thing in nature, there is no exception for the selves to be existed in the future. Therefore, we come to know that the selves had their past existence and will give also future ones.
2) If the selves are created with the birth of the body and are destroyed with the death, then our education and experience become useless. If the pre-existence of self is denied, then we cannot explain the different nature of the selves. The different between one and other is due to the rich or poor experiences with which the selves are born. The different characteristic is due to their past inheritance. Selves incarnated in men, beasts, birds and insects. They have different organizations, functions and nature.
3) Some are born with excellence. This in born perfection is acquired in the previous life. If we observe a certain stages of development we acquire in past. For example, in the case lovers, if the love comes at first sight between two persons, it is because the souls had previous affection with each other in their previous lives. There facts reveal that the souls had previous existence and also have the future life.
Radhakrishna says, “It is invested in a finer vehicle, the subtle body (suksma Sarira) when It leaves the gross one. The subtle body secures the necessary physical basis. The subtle body, which is said to accompany one through out, one’s empirical existence, is the form on which the physical body is molded. It is this which assumes the body necessary for its efficiency at its next birth by attracting physical elements to itself.”[27]He points out that the transmigration of a self from one body to another takes place with the subtle body. The self with the subtle body enters into a new physical body. Therefore, the character of the self continues from existence to another.
Rebirth is not meaningless but it has a purpose and meaning. The purpose of rebirth is to make the soul perfect. The self is imperfect to day and it moves on perpetually for fulfillment and perfection. So, as long as the self remains imperfect, its evolution is a continuous process.
Conclusion
The western and eastern philosopher’s argue that the death is not the end. After the death our life will continue in another form. Plato explains his view on immortality of soul from the cycle of opposition. The contraries are produced from the contraries. Life comes from the death. Therefore, out of death comes life. St. Thomas Aquinas explains the immortality of the soul from his religious belief. He argues that God will rise up our bodies along with his resurrection. Swami Vivekananda says that it is like finding the lost necklace on one’s own neck. The immortality is the nature of the soul but we are not aware of it. When the soul is able to realize it nature then it will liberate form ignorance. Mahatma Gandhi’s view if the immortality of soul is based on Hindu beliefs. He interprets it by emphasizing the ethical value of this belief. He feels that by believing the rebirth one can make adjustment with life and gives courage to face all the problems in his life. So that, he becomes pious, moral and noble living in the world. Radhakrishnan says that the rejection of rebirth is that there is no evidence anybody having the memory of the past life. He further explains that nobody has the memory of the existence in his mother’s womb but it does not mean that it is not a state of existence. So, the soul exists before our birth but we do not have the memory of the past life.
CHAPTER III
THE CRITICAL APPROACH TO THE IMMORTALITY OF SOUL
Introduction
Do people live after death? This question has been asked since the dawn of the civilization. There are two possible answers to it. Either human being will live after the death or they will not live after their death. Immortality is a complex issue dependent on several other philosophical questions. There are many other theories, which deny the life after death and also there are many arguments for proving the existences of the soul after death. The purpose of this chapter is to have the critical look on the immortality of the soul both positively as well as negatively. Positively, this chapter brings out the possible arguments for the immortality of the soul. On the other hand, it brings out the reasons for the denial of immortality of the soul and its criticism.
3.1 Arguments for the immortality of soul
3.1.1 Argument on the basis of science
From the viewpoint of science the word immortality means deathlessness or the state, which is not subject to death. Science has proved that matter and energy are indestructible. So, every particle of matter is not subject to absolute destruction or death, in this sense, we must say that matter is immortal, energy is immortal, force is immortal, because they are not subject to destruction. Matter and energy of this universe remain constant, which can neither be increased nor diminished. For instance, any material object when consumed by fire will exhibit an identical quantity both before and after its consumption by fire. Similarly destruction of the body does not involve the destruction of the soul.[28]
3.1.2 Arguments on the basis of knowledge
Knowledge of the person depends on the feeling, willing and thinking. We can transcend the limitation of time and space by our intelligence. Thought is not limited like willing. In memory, we dive deep into the remote past, and in imagination we go forward in the very distant future. Thus through our memory power we can know our previous life, and the same time anticipate the future happenings of the self. This implies the immortality of the soul and its never-ending continuation. The science of astrology can provide us sufficient material regarding the past and the future activities of the soul. No doubt our body is destroyed but the soul remains immortal.
3.1.3 Metaphysical arguments
Plato conceived the soul as a substantial reality, which is simple in structure. As simple substance, the soul is destructible. A composite substance is subject to dissolution, but the simple a substance must be imperishable. Plato believed that the soul is of the divine essence and is therefore is immortal. It is eternal in nature. So, according to Plato the idea of soul is free from dissolution and death.
Descartes stated that the soul is a substance of the pure consciousness. The consciousness is indestructible and imperishable. Spinoza holds that man is immortal only insofar as he participates in the life of pure reason independent of sensibility. The physical body, which consists of soul, becomes immortal if it free from passions and prejudices. That soul is eternal and immortal which gets the intellectual love of God.
According to Leibniz, the soul is imperishable and can never die out for it will involve a break in a continuity of reality. Leibniz says, “Death is only apparent, not real”.
According to Kant, “Our moral law is a categorical imperative which demands unconditional obedience from man. It is a priori and not derived from experiences. It is free from empirical factors. This categorical imperative is the universal moral law, which is not connected with any external ends. The summum bonum of the highest good is the nature and end of the soul. Since the complete realization of the highest good is the destiny of the highest spirit, it implies the continuation of the existences of the soul for the attainment of the summum bonum”. So, according to Kant’s metaphysical and moral doctrine, the soul is immortal.
3.1.4 Moral Argument
G.E.Moore maintains that all ethical propositions are based on the notion of good. Moore says, “The good has no definition because it is simple and has no parts. The concept of good is un-analyzable, which is similar to the concept of soul. Like good, the soul is simple one. It cannot be destroyed. The soul is eternal and immortal”[29]. Kant says that if the man’s rational implies the possibility of realizing the summum bonum it is possible only on the supposition of a supreme moral being of God, who is immortal like the soul.
3.1.5 Religio- Philosophical Argument
Hinduism, Christianity and Islam uphold the theories of the immortality of the soul. The followers of these religions believe that the souls were created out of nothingness. But they will have to enjoy or suffer all throughout eternity. If these souls exist today and they will continue to exist throughout the eternity. They must have existed from eternity.
According to Hinduism, the true nature of soul is Atman. Sri Krishna said to Arjuna in Gita, “The Atman is neither born nor does it die. Coming into being and ceasing to be do not take place in it; unborn, eternal, constant, and ancient, it is not killed when the body is slain”.[30] The soul is indestructible, eternal, unborn and changeless. The soul is eternal, all pervading, stable, immovable and everlasting.
In Advaita-Vedanta, Atman is the same as Brahman. It is pure consciousness. It is the only reality. As Brahman, the Atman is pure existence and consciousness is one. But ultimately Atman is devoid of all characteristics. Thus in Advaitism, to be immortal is to be one with the absolute reality of Brahman, to realize the identity between Atman and Brahman in a state, which is the independent of all limitations and empirical determinations. Immortality is the complete transcendence of all determinations. Similarly in Samkhya the attainment of immortality means a long process of culture and purification of the self. Thus all the Religio- philosophical systems aim to lead the human mind to believe that the soul is eternal, that it continues to exist after death.
3.2 Arguments against the immortality of the soul
3.2.1 Epicurus (341-270 B.C)
Epicurus was the founder father of the philosophy known as Epicureanism. He says, “Death the most dreaded of evils, is… of no concern to us, for while we exist death. Is not present, and when death is present we no longer exist”.[31] Epicures believed that fear of death was one of the main reasons for human unhappiness and he said that the fear had two sources,
a) Fear that dying will be painful.
b) Fear of a terrible after life to be afflicted by the Gods.
He said that dying might be painful, but it was soon over. There was no life after death and thus no hell. Since we would not be there to experience anything, we should no more fear death than we should fear falling asleep.
His arguments can be stated in logical forms as follows:
1) ‘At all times, either I exist or I am dead.
2) When I exist, I am not dead.
3) When I am not dead, my death is of no concern to me.
4) Therefore, when I exist, my death is of no concern to me.
5) When I am dead, I do not exist.
6) When I do not exist, my death is of no concern to me.
7) Therefore, when I am dead, my death is of no concern to me.
8) Therefore, at no time is my death of concern to me.’[32]
Epicurus claimed that something was bad for me only if I experienced it. Since I did not experience the state of being dead is not bad for me. Epicurus brought out the reason for the fear of death.
a) Some fear death because it was unknown.
b) Some fear death because they would have face it alone.
c) Some fear death because it separated from their friends and their loved ones.
d) Some fear death because their hopes and goals for the future would remain unattained.
e) Some fear death because they suspected their loved ones might fare badly after they were gone.
f) Some fear death because they believed that it annihilates them.
Criticism
1) “Things that I do not experience can be bad for me”, says Epicurus. This seems to be false because it is impossible to experience everything. We cannot experience certain things. It does not mean that it is bad. For example, I am fired from my job because of my decision that was made at a meeting, which was held without my knowledge. Then the meeting was bad for me even though I did not experience it.
2) He may be correct in his argument that there is no life after death but he is wrong in his thinking. His argument could overcome the human fear of death. For many people, the fear of non-being, no longer existing are the main reasons for the fear of death.
3.2.2 David Hume (1711-1776)
There are innumerable arguments which have been explained the arguments against the notion of immortality of soul by the materialist. These arguments are material in nature. So, these arguments are called the arguments from the analogy of nature. Hume rejected the concept of immortality of soul.
First he explains when two objects are closely connected that brings some equal change in the other objects. When the change is so great in the former that it totally dissolved, there will be total dissolution of the later. If we relate this concept to our bodies and minds, it is clear that changes in our bodies produce proposinate changes in our minds. For examples, a small pains leads to minimal mental confusion while great pain leads to total mental collapse. The total dissolution of the body at the time of death is accompanied by the total dissolution of the mind.
The second analogy has taken from the nature, which he has drawn from the fact that no form in the nature can survive, if it is transferred from its original environment to a different environment. For example, trees cannot exist in water any more than the fish can live in the air. Just like, a slight change in atmosphere would make our life impossible on this planet. If the earth were the relatively small distance closer to the sun, all life will be burned from our planet. If it is so, what reason is there to suppose that our soul or mind can survive such a radical change as the dissolution of our body?
Hume constitutes a third analogy from the similarity from the anatomy between animals and men. From the comparative anatomy we learn that animals resemble men. Is it not natural to assume that there is also the resemblance between the souls of animals and of human? If it is so, then animals also are immortal but the immortalists claim that all the animals and plants are mortal, only the human beings have the immortal life. Hume argues that both animals and human beings are not immortal. They are mortal beings.
Criticism
1) The first analogy is grounded in the interrelatedness of body and soul. He claims that a change in the one will bring about proposinate change in the other. This analogy assumes an inter-actionist view of the relationship of mind or soul to body. Many philosophers reject this solution to mind and body problem. This analogy presupposes that a change in one element will bring about a proportionate change in the other. Hume’s assumes that the proposinate response in the mind or soul to the dissolution of the body would be the corresponding dissolution of the soul. But why should this be? Is this a logical necessity? Is there empirical evidence in the support of Hume’s contention? To gain that kind of evidences one would have to experience death. It is not necessities that while the body dissolved the soul also to be dissolved. Our body has the quality of mortal but our soul has the quality of immortal. So, there is no evidence for Hume’s arguments against the immortality of the soul.
2) The second analogy, that man soul cannot survive an environmental change, as trees cannot live in water and fishes cannot live in the air. Hume simply assumes that the soul man is incapable of existence when the body is dissolved. Hume has no empirical evidence of what happens to a human being’s soul after he dies, although such evidence is readily available for a submerged tree or a fish in air. Suppose that we saw a frog when it was in the water, we conclude that the frogs cannot exist in the land. But this would be a false observation. Most animals are fit either for land or for water. The frogs can exist both in the land and in the water.
3) The third analogy, has taken from comparative anatomy (what is true of animals will be true of human beings because they resembles one another in certain ways) is surely false. Resemblance or similarity is not identity. The analogies are weak where there are great differences. Whatever is applicable to animals; need not to be applicable to human beings because human beings are superior to the animals. So, the differences between the human beings and animals make grave doubt on Hume’s analogy.
3.2.3 Karl Marx (1818-1883)
Marx’s materialist concept of the denial of immortality of soul is based on the communist interpretation of religion. Marxism insists that philosophy is based upon the knowledge derived from an analysis of reality; the true philosophy of religion is the product of investigation on religion. The belief in immortality of soul is connected with religion.
Marx developed the concept of denial of immortality from the early civilization of the society. He says, “From the very times men, still completely ignorant of the structure of their own bodies, under the stimulus of dream apparitions came to believe that their thinking and sensation were not activities of their bodies, but of the distinct soul which inhabits the body and leaves it at death-from this time men have been driven to reflect about the relation between this soul and outside the world. If upon death it took leave of the body and lived on, there was no occasion to invent yet another distinct death for it. Thus arose the idea of its immortality, which at the stage of development appeared not at all as a consolation but as a fate against which it was no use fighting, and often enough, as among the Greeks, as a positive misfortune. Not religious desire for consolation, but the quandary arising from the common universal ignorance of what to do with soul, once its existence had been accepted, after the death of the body, led in general way to the tedious notion of personal immortality”.[33]
Man in the present capitalist society of economical explanation creates religious ideas, which escape him from the hopelessness of a life of economical slavery. Man instinctively created the concept of immortality in order to escape himself from the fear of inevitable death.
Criticism
Marx looks at the immortality in the materialist way. He claims that the concept of immortality of soul comes from the early-uncivilized society, in that period, our thinking and sensation had not been well developed. Yes, it is true that the concept of immortality of soul came from the early-uncivilized society but even in the modern civilization, people hold the same notion on the immortality of soul. There are some evidences for the life after death. So, we cannot deny the concept the life after death.
3.2.4 Bertrand Russell (1872-1970)
Bertrand Russell rejected the concept of the existence of the soul after death. He argues, “The matter of the body continually changing by the process of nutriment and wastage. Atoms in the physics are no longer supposed to have continues existence; there is no sense in saying: this is the same atom as the one that existed a few minutes ago. The continuity of a human body is matter of appearance and behaviors, not of substance. The same things apply to the mind. We thing and feel and act, but there is not, in addition to thoughts and feelings and actions, a bare entity. The mind or the soul suffers these occurrences. The mental continuity of a person is a person is a continuity of habit and memory: there was yesterday one person whose feelings I can remember, and that person I regard as myself of yesterday; but, infact, myself of yesterday was only certain mental occurrences which are now remembered and are regarded as part of the person who now recollects them. All that constitute a person is a series of experiences connected by memory and by certain similarities of the sort we call habit. If therefore, we are to believe that a person survives after death, we must believe that the memories and habits, which constitute the person, will continue to be exhibited in a new set of occurrences. But no one can prove it.”[34]
He further argues that all the arguments, which support the life after death, are not the rational arguments but they based on emotions that cause belief in a future life. He explains his arguments from the dawn of the history. He says, “The most important of these emotions is fear of death, which is instinctive and biological useful. If we genuinely and whole-heartedly believed in the future life, we should cease completely to fear death. The effects will be curious, and probably such as most of us would deplore. But our human and subhuman ancestor have fought and exterminated their enemies throughout many geological ages and have profited by courage; it is therefore an advantage to the victors in the struggle for life to be able, on occasion, to overcome the natural fear of death. Among animals and savages, instinctive pugnacity suffices for this purpose; but at a certain stage of development, as the Mohammedans first proved, belief in paradise has considerable military value as reinforcing natural pugnacity. We should therefore admit that militarists are wise in encouraging the belief in immortality, always supposing that this belief does not become so profound as to product indifference to the affairs of the world.”[35]
Bertrand Russell rejects the right and wrong arguments, which is the one of the arguments for supporting the immortality of soul. He says, “We can not say that man knows right and wrong, but only that some men do- which men? Nietzsche argued in favor of ethic profoundly different from Christ’s and some powerful governments have accepted his teaching. If the knowledge of right and wrong is to be an argument for immortality, we must first settle whether to believe Christ or Nietzsche, and then argue that Christians are immortal, but Hitler and Mussolini are not, or vice versa. The decision will obviously be made on the battlefield, not in study. Those who have the best poison gas will have the ethic of the future and will therefore be the immortal ones.”[36]
Criticism
1) It is true that in our present existence the function of our minds is some how dependent on our bodies. We can all recall instances where we were unable to think well because of our state of our physical bodies. It is not necessary to the soul to carry all the memories to the future life. Because our memory needs only to this present life, it is not needed to the future life. It could be that the conditions of those existences are quite different from those of this present life.
2) The concept of the existence of the soul comes not merely from emotions but there are some evidences for the existences of the soul after death.
3) God is the supreme judge over all the things. We are interested in seeing the deeds of the man but failed to see his inner consciences. Our understanding of right and wrong depend on only the external things. We cannot certify any person as good by seeing his outward actions. We must go deeper to look his inner feelings. So, in that sense, his right and wrong argument is not a logical one.
3.2.5 Flew’s Argument
Antony Flew argues that the notion of life after death is not logically clear. They are incoherent in their argument. He offers two related arguments for non- accepting the immortality of soul. First, ‘we all have survived death’ is the self-contradictory. For example, in an airplane crash, there are two main categories, the death and survivors. If anybody dies in that crash, the first question is ‘whether the particular person survives or death?’ we cannot say that the particular person is dead but he survives. If you say this answer, it is illogical. There is only one possible that either he may die or he may live. According to Flew ‘we all of us survives death’ has not a clear meaning in itself. So it is an invalid argument.
Second, statement is ‘we all of us live forever’. This statement is empirically false. Flew says, “The paradigm true statement through out the history of logic is the statement all men are mortal. This generalization is as massively confirmed as any generalization can possible be, and it is the flat contrary of we all of us live forever.”[37] He furthermore argues that what it would be like to witness my own funeral? This is imaginable. It is possible us to imagine my funeral- I am in the casket, my mother is crying, a priest is offering prayers etc. but this imagination does not help us to accept the life after death. If it is really my funeral, then I cannot witness my funeral because I am dead in the coffin.
Criticism
1) Flew raised a question against the immortality of the soul, ‘in an airplane crash, whether the particular individual survives or death?’ To answer to this question, we must understand the difference between the soul and body. The soul is superior that our body. Our body depend on the soul but it is not necessary to the soul depends on our body. So that, during the death, our body is unable to carry the soul and our body is destructed but not the soul. So, in the case of airplane crash, if any one survives with the body and soul, then we can call him as a living person. If the body is without the soul, then he will be called as a death person.
2) In his second argument, he emphasis that all men are mortal. Yes, it is true that all men are mortal. It means, all our bodies are mortal but our soul is immortal.
Conclusion
The soul is the infinite and immortal. It is beyond space, time and causation. Being simple, it can die, not it can take any form. Soul is not a force, neither is it thought. It is the manufacturer of thought, but not thought itself. It is not the body, nor the sensation. It is ever free and omnipresent.
According to Advaita philosophy, there is only one thing is real in the universe, which is called Brahman. According to this philosophy, each man consist of three parts- the body, the mind and the self (Atman). Atman (the soul) is only existence in the human body, which is immaterial. Because it is immaterial, it cannot be compound, it does not obey the law of cause and effect, and so it is immortal. So, after the death of our body, our soul will go to God from whom it came from. It is like, the electricity, which comes, out of the dynamo, completes the circuit, and returns to it. The soul is projected from God, it passes through all sorts of human forms, and at last it is in man, and man is in the nearest approach to God.
CHAPTER IV
EVIDENCES FOR THE IMMORTALITY OF SOUL
Introduction
Experiences of coming back to earthly life are the rare case in the history. There are many researchers who have interested on this subject brought some evidences for the existence of the soul after our physical death. They have revealed only the anatomical and psychological aspects in a scientific manner based on their observation. The experiences they studied fell into three distinct categories: a) the experiences of persons who were resuscitated after having been thought, adjusted, or pronounced clinically dead by their doctors. b) The experiences of the persons who, in the course of accidents or severe injury or illness, came very close to physical death. c) The experience of the persons who, as they died, told them to other people who were present. The purpose of this chapter is to bring out knowledge about life after death, from which we will be very much enriched by understanding the true records in which world-famous doctors have explained. What they have actually seen in cases where people who were declared clinically dead have come back to life. The following recorded incidents are taken from the various books. The most uncommon and marvelous incidents are as follows:
4.1 Scientific Case of Existence of Human Soul
1) A well-known psychiatrist Dr. Elizabeth Kubler-Ross interviewed people those who have experienced a clinical form of defined death. Dr. Kubler-Ross described those three components common to these death experiences a) a sense of the soul floating out of the body. b) Feeling of peace and wholesomeness .c) a meeting with someone who had previously dead. Dr. Kubler-Ross Mrs. Barbara Pryor, the wife of Arkansas Governor, David Pryor.
“Mrs. Pryor suffered a pulmonary embolism-a blood clot in her lungs-following an emergency hysterectomy in a Washington Hospital on Thanksgiving Day 1971. The physician in attendance was one Dr. Donald Payne. Before Mrs. Pryor slipped into unconsciousness she saw a look of fear come over the Doctor’s face. She says, “My spirit started to rise in the air. I was so at peace. The feeling was magnificent. I could see my body on the bed and knew it once belonged to me. But I felt completely detached from it. I didn’t care what happened to my body.”
Dr. Payne was shouting at his nurses “code blue! Code blue! -An emergency code, which meant that a life was at stake. Later Dr. Payne recalled that he was beating on Mrs. Pryor’s chest and giving her an external cardiac massage. Mrs. Pryor said she watched the frantic activity while her spirit floated above the room, which was rapidly filling up with nurses and other doctors.
Mrs. Pryor says, “I remember thinking’, why are you working so hard? I am completely and utterly happy’. A man I had never seen before came to my body and administered a short to the heart. When he finished a nurse rushed to the bed and in her haste knocked over the pole holding the bottles of intravenous fluid. I watched the pole fall on the bed and saw one of the bottles hit the side of my body’s face. But I did not care. I was free of all pain everything that was going on below me in the room seemed to have nothing to do with me. Then I had the strangest feeling that at any second I would find my brother, who had died the year before of leukemia, right next to me. I was just about to see my brother when I looked down again and saw Dr. Payne massaging my body’s chest. In an pleading voice, he said, ‘breath Barbara, breath’ I remember saying to myself ‘oh no, I won’t. You cannot make me breath. You can not make me to leave this paradise.’ Just as I said that, a searing pain rushed through my chest and instinctively I knew that I had returned to my body. I felt trapped and angered for being forced to return. If there had been any way to stop the doctors, I would have done it. When I woke up, life-supporting machines were all around me and there was a painful black and blue welt around my eye. The nurse confirmed what I already knew – another nurse had knocked over the intravenous bottle, which had struck, at the side of my head. My out-of- body experience was wonderful. Now I know there is nothing to fear from death. I know there is really something else-peace and tranquility like I have never known on earth”.[38]
2) Dr. George Ritchie, a psychiatrist who has said that after he was declared clinically dead back in 1943. He underwent a life after life experience for a full nine minutes. Dr. George Ritchie narrated his experience of life after life as follows:
“There is apparently no question that Ritchie was pronounced dead. He has the hospital staff’s sworn testimony on that, including one doctor’s additional opinion that Ritchie’s virtual call from death and return to vigorous health has to be explained in terms other than natural means”.
This incident had happened in December 1943. Ritchie was hospitalized with pneumonia. His condition worsened day by day. After a week in bed he finally collapsed with a 106.5-degree fever. Twenty-four hours later he was discovered no signs of life and was pronounced dead. About nine minutes later, the hospital ward boy who discovered Ritchie dead, thought he was the young enlisted man move. But the doctor again declared him dead but just to be sure gave a shot of adrenalin. At that instant, Ritchie’s vital signs returned. What happened to Ritchie during those intervening nine minutes has been described in great detail. He had feelings of peace, hearing noise, leaving the human body, seeing a being of light, seeing a panoramic review, of one’s life and approaching a border or limit. Before he fell ill, Ritchie had bee scheduled to go to Richmond to complete medical studies at medical college of Virginia and now dead his instinct was rush to Richmond. This is how he related his experiences:
“I sat up on the side of the bed in the little isolation room. In the process of trying to find my uniform I looked back on the bed and there was this body lying there. But I didn’t have time to think about that. I had one thing on my mind. I knew that I had missed my train. I knew I had to get back to Richmond. So I came on out, I am going back to Richmond and I see this ward boy coming up with tray. I turned to tell him to watch where he is going and he either walked through me or I through him. I did not have time to think about that either. Now I know this sounds ridiculous. I got outside and swoosh, man; I am traveling with something approaching the seed of sound, about a hundred to five hundred feet above the trees. Suddenly I am crossing the large river and I see this little town. There is this lone guy coming down the street; they’re this all night café on the corner. So I sit down on the sidewalk to neither ask nor see me. So, I thought, well, I will tap him on the side of his cheek to get his attention. And I went through him. Suddenly it hit me that I had left my body back there in the bed. I knew there was not any sense of going further…. just as fast as I left, I got back there…”
But before he could re-enter the body, Ritchie was confronted with a light, the intensity of which was so great, it was like turning on a million welders’ light”. Out that light stepped another form of sheer light and at that point, the hospital wall disappeared and every single thing that had ever happen to me from the time I was born was there in panoramic view.”[39]
3) The third evidence from the famous book “life after life” written by Dr. Raymond A. Moody Jr. M.D., which was published in the year 1977. Dr Moody categories his experiences into three: a) the experiences of persons who were resuscitated after having been thought, adjusted, or pronounced clinically dead by their doctors. b) The experiences of the persons who, in the course of accidents or severe injury or illness, came very close to physical death. c) The experience of the persons who, as they died, told them to other people who were present’[40].
Moody set down the outline of their reports in the following passage:
“A man is dying and as he reaches the point of the greatest physical distress, he hears himself pronounced dead by his doctor. He beings to hear the uncomfortable noise, a loud ringing or buzzing, and at the same time feels himself moving very rapidly through a long dark tunnel. After this, he suddenly finds himself outside of his own physical body, but still in the immediate physical environment, and he sees his own body from a distance, as though he is a specter, he watches the resuscitation attempt from this unusual vantage point and is in a state of emotional upheaval.
After a while, he collects himself and becomes more accustomed to his odd condition. He notices that he still has a body, but one of the very different nature and with very different powers from the physical body he has left behind. Soon other things begin to happen. Others come to meet him and to help him. He glimpses the spirit of a kind he has never encountered before- a being of light- appears before him. This being asked him a question, nonverbally, to make him evaluate his life and helps him along by showing him a panoramic, instantaneous play back of the major events of his life. At some point he finds himself approaching some sort of barriers or border, apparently representing the limit between earthly life and the next life. Yet, he finds that he must go back to the earth that the time for his death has not yet come. At this point he resist, for by now he is taken up with his experiences in the after life and does not to return. Instance feeling of joy, love, and peace overwhelms him. Despite his attitude, though, he some how reunites with his physical body and lives.”[41]
4) The fourth evidences from Mrs. Sthira Soudaminee who had a wonderful premonitory vision while she was betwixt asleep and awake before the death of Binodi Lal.
Mrs. Sthira soundaminee narrates the incident as follows: “About twenty years ago a younger brother of mine (Binodi Lal) had been suffering from consumption. We tried our best to save his life, but could not. We came to realize at last that his earthly career must soon come to an end, so we were in a state of constant dread on his account.
It was about 10 at night, three days before his death, and I was attending my sick brother. I went into the next room to see if I could freshen up my energies a bit. A little while, I felt myself extremely drowsy. Just than it seem to be that something was hovering over my head. When I heard this I woke up with a start. What I felt on that occasion can be well imagined. Suddenly however, I saw a light. I saw that it was emanating from the body of beautiful young man. Keenly, scrutinizing his face, I discovered that he was my nephew Saroj Kanti (son of Brother Basanta Kumar), who had died sometimes before. The whole family dearly loved him. My nephew looked towards me and said: “why are you so anxious? Uncle is now suffering, but he will be all right after three days.” Saying this figure vanished.
My brother died exactly three days after I had seen the vision. And then I came to realize that what the spirit of my nephew meant was that death would release my brother from the grip of the disease and end his sufferings after three days. But yet I could feel that men are living after death, live a happier life than they do here. This consoled me to a great extent. Let everyone cultivate spiritualism and he will be able to defy many of the misery of the world.”[42]
4) Mr. K.I. Isaac narrated one marvelous incident in his book glorious of life after death, which is as follows:
“ One my distant relatives, Mrs. Aleyamma, Mangalamadhathil house, near the Simhasana church, Puthenangady, Kottayam (Kerala), aged 57 years, had an attack of a rare disease by which her entire body was swollen with excruciating pain. She was writing with pain and wailing day and night. I used to visit her occasionally to console and pray for her relief. On one such occasion I saw her lying still. Only her mother aged 84 was there at that time. On seeing me she broke down and said ‘ my son she is dead –yet please close her eyelids my hand does not come for that.’ I was only 24 that time quit inexperienced in such thing stood hesitant.
Silently three minutes passed and then her eyelids closed automatically and in the next moment opened in a lively manner as if opening into consciousness. After sometime she cried and enquired ‘son why did they cast me back into this body? It would have been better if they had kept me there only’. She continued to wail. By this I understood that her soul has left the body and she had gone some distance in the path of death leaving the sickened body. I kept asking short questions and got very valuable information.
A) Were you not here? Where had you gone?
She said: “yes, I was not here, had been far away. I was very happy there. No pain or discomfort. I am very sorry they put me back here in this body.
B) How did you go there?
That was very simple. While I was lying here in a great pain I felt great weakness in my body and the pain gradually reducing. I felt my bone getting loose. Darkness entered my eyes and I was in complete darkness. Then I sensed that I was getting out of this body and going into thick darkness. I felt as if I was in the different body moving fast into space and as if I was flying or shooting into darkness. While proceeding like that I could see far away a small speck of light. I felt as if that light was drawing me towards it, as it was becoming brighter as I went shooting forward. When the light brighter around me, there was no trace of darkness. Then I realized that I died and was taken away from the world of suffering. I continued flying like cotton in the wind in absolute weightlessness. Looking around I could see angels. Then suddenly a loud voice sounded: ‘not yet time’. At the same moment they left me into this body.”[43]
6) “In October 2003 issue of the Reader’s Digest, Anita Bartholomew narrated an instance in which a Neurosurgeon Robert Spetzler and a British researcher Susan Blackmore PhD., spoke about the strange symptoms observed in a patient Pam Reynolds, 35 years, who had undergone a brain operation in 1991.Under deep anesthesia the entire blood in her body was drained off to a heart machine stopping her heart function and transferring breathing also to another machine. The brain surgery was performed for one hour after opening the skull with an electric saw. During that time life actually left her body and she was clinically dead. She met all the criteria for death.
Later when she was resuscitated, she spoke about her experience during the time when her body was in a condition. She said that she found herself traveling through a tunnel towards a light. At the end she saw her long dead grandmother. Then her uncle who led her back to her body instructed her to return. On returning she felt like plunging into the pool of ice water. On coming back to life she told the doctor that entire she had seen and experienced. The doctor is still bewildered at this strange phenomenon.
According to the indication of the different instrument, the doctor is sure that during the time of the operation there was no life in the body. He compared the body with computer with no power connection. Absolutely dead! In this state what had been her experience? She saw the doctors working on her and her body as if she saw it from a distance, lying still. When the eyes of the body are closed and brain dead, who is that animate personality viewing at a distance and remembering full details for recollection on resuscitation?
People may see uncommon sight in a coma or in hallucination. But for that the brain should function. In this case it is ruled out. This means life which requires all these vital organs functioning, has gone out of the body. That life is not in the hold of any doctor or psychiatrist. It has its own way of function and expression as revealed by this woman who had undergone such a very special brain surgery and revived.”[44]
Conclusion
The above incidents help us to have a strong belief in the life after death. These incidents are not myth. The reputed doctors collect these witnesses. These incidents are taken from the observation of the doctors as well as the words of person concerned that have actually gone through the experience of death and come back to earthly life. Life after death is not an issue of blind faith but it is real. Therefore we can sure that there is the possibility of soul going out of the body, the soul may come back to the body to continue life on this earth till God’s appointed time.
General conclusion
People believe that there must be some life after death. But exactly what sort of life? For whom is there something in man apart from body? A soul? What is the nature of soul? Whence did it come and where would it go and what it would become of it when man dies? These are fabulous questions. The history of philosophy attempts to answer these questions. They have answered in variety of ways. So this dissertation is study of how the great religions of the world and philosophers have handled these questions.
After analyzing of this subject the researcher likes to conclude that death is the mysteries things in the world. Once born, man should die. It is sure that all people will die in one day. It is a marvelous phenomenon that approaches us through its own mysterious way at an appointed time. Death is the gateway of eternal life. It is like lying down to sleep, sometimes due to various reasons we may not get sleep though we long for it. But at an unpredictable movement we fall asleep. Dying is also like that. Death is not the end of life but it is a preparation to the next life. Evolution is not ended with the evolving of human being but it continues in the realm of consciousness, which enables the man to realize he is only the embodiment of five elements but he has the divine with him. That invited him to the next world.
This dissertation will offer new points of view and useful information to anyone who comes forward with on open mind to enter into the secret boundaries of the spiritual realm. So who are interested in research and bold enough to enter without fear into the unexplored regions of the spiritual world, may come forward, and try to find out the details, not only for the information of those who desires to know them, but also for the people to believe.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BOOK
Basant kumar Lal. Contemporary Indian Philosophy. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Pvt. Ltd., 1999.346pp.
Benjamin Walker. An Encylopedic Survey of Hinduism. Delhi: Rupa & Co, 2005. 307pp.
Brain Daires. Philosophy of Religion .New York: Oxford University Press, 2000. 754pp.
Claude Summer. The Philosophy of Man. New Delhi: Central Printing Press, 1974.376pp.
Edward J. Gratsoh. Aquinas Summa. Bangalore: Theological Publication in India, 1990. 305pp.
Ghosh M.K. Life Beyond Death. New Delhi: Cosmo Publications , 1984.395pp.
Isaac K.I.Glorious. Life After Death. New Delhi: D.K.Print world (P) Ltd, 2007. 205pp.
Kalghatgi .G. Jainism. Madras Rathinam Press, 1978. 92 pp.
Kamath M.V. Philosophy of Life and Death. Mumbai:Jaico Publishing House, 2001.335p.
Louis P.Pajman. Introduction to Philosophy. U.S.AWads Worth and Thomson Learning, 2000.335pp.
Martin Forward. Religion a beginners Guide. England: One World Publications, 2006.190pp.
Michael Peterson (ed). Philosophy of Religion. New York: Oxford University Press, 2007.648pp.
1ohapartra A.R. Philosophy of Religion. New Delhi: Stealing Pubishers Pvt.Ltd.1990, 210pp.
Muhammad Sharif Chaudhry. Concept of God in the Quran. Delhi: Adam Publishers, 2006.175pp.
Paul J.Glenn – A Tour of the Summa of St.Thomas Aquinas. Bangalore: Theological Publication in India, 2001.466pp.
Rama Shankar Srivastava. Contemporary Indian Philosophy. New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers Pvt.Ltd., 1983.385pp.
Stephen Fuchs. Origin of Religion. Kerala: Pontifical Institute of Theology and Philosophy, 1975.152pp.
Thomas Velliamthadam. Greek wisdom. Kottaym: Catholic mission press, 1981.220pp.
Tiwari K.N. Comparative Religion. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass publisher’s pvt.Ltd. 2004.225pp.
Whitall N.Perry. A Treasurary of traditional wisdom. New Delhi: DP’S Impressive Impressions, 1971.1144pp.
INTERNET
http://www.yahoo.com/Free Wikipedia Encyclopedia/ “Life after death”.
http://www.google.com/ “Life after death”.
[1] Stephen Fuchs, “Origin of religion”, p-25.
[2] Stephen Fuchs, “Origin of Religion”, p-29.
[3] Martin Forward, “Religion a beginner’s guide”, p-122.
[4] Whitall.N.Perry, “A treasury of traditional wisdom”.p-225
[5] M.Talreja, “Philosophy of Vedas”. P-75
[6] K.N.Tiwari, “Comparative religion”. P-27
[7]K.N.Tiwari, “Comparative religion”. P-25
[8] Whitall N. Perry, “A treasury of traditional wisdom”. P-223
[9] M.Talreja, “Philosophy of Vedas”. P-76
[10] K.N. Tiwari, “comparative religion”. P-100
[11] G. Kalghatgi, “Jainism”. P-61
[12] Edward J. Gratsch, “Aquinas’ summa”.p-285.
[13] Dr. Muhammad sharif chaudhry, “ concept of God in the Quran” p-135
[14]Ibid, p-139
[15] Thomas vellilamthadam, “Greek wisdom”,p-89
[16] Thomas vellilamthadam, “Greek wisdom”,p-88
[17] Thomas Vellilam thadam, “ Greek wisdom”,p-89
[18] Paul J. Glenn, “ A tour of summa of St. Thomas Aquinas”, p-454
[19] Edward J. Gratsch, “Aquinas’ summa”,p-296
[20] Basant Kumar Lal, “ Contemporary Indian philosophy”,p-25
[21] ibid,p-26
[22] Basant Kumar Lal, “Contemporary Indian philosophy”,p-27
[23]Ibid, p-28.
[24] Ibid, P-29.
[25]Basant Kumar Lal, “Contemporary Indian philosophy”,p-107.
[26] Basant Kumar Lat,“Contemporary Indian Philosophy”, p-25.
[27] Rama Shanker Srivastava, “Contemporary Indian philosophy”, p-324.
[28] A.R. Mohapatra, “philosophy of religion”, p-40.
[29] A.R. Mohapatra, “philosophy of religion”, p-41.
[30] A.R. Mohapatra, “ philosophy of religion”, p-42.
[31] Brian Davies, “philosophy of religion”, p-698.
[32] Brian Davies, “philosophy of religion, p-699.
[33] Claude Sumner, “The philosophy of man”, p-71.
[34] Brian Davies, “ philosophy of religion”, p-721.
[35]Brian Davies, “ philosophy of religion, p-722.
[36] Ibid, p-723.
[37] Brian Davies, “philosophy of religion”, p-691.
[38] M.V. Kamath, “ philosophy of life and death”, p-25-27.
[39] M.V. Kamath, “ philosophy of life and death”, p-27-29.
[40] Ibid, p-29.
[41] Louis P. Pojman, “Introduction to philosophy”, p-462.
[42] M.K. Ghosh, “Life beyond death”, p-49.
[43] K.I. Isaac, “Glorious of life after death”, p-19-21.
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
“Living come from the death, just as the dead come from the living” – says Plato. Existence of the soul after death is an unsolvable problem to the religions and the philosophers. Because, no one knows that what will happen after our death. No one can experience this. This is the mystery of the world. Many seekers searched for finding out what will happen to the soul after our death and whether the soul will survive or not. They could not give any scientific proofs for the survival of the soul after the death.
The notion of life after death came from the prehistoric civilizations. Some philosophers claim that these beliefs are the foundation for the origin of religions. Herbert Spencer (1820 – 1903) says, “Re-animation explains the concern of the primitive peoples with the preservation of the body after death, and gives rise to such burial practices as embalming and the provision of food, implements, and clothing for the deceased. When it became clear that the dead never come back to life, man concluded that the ghost must inhabit another world, and only then did the concept of a soul come in to being. Belief in souls is consequently later than belief in ghosts. The ancestral spirits were believed to live in a world separate from, but similar to, that of the living. When man became more sophisticated about natural events, and asked for their causes, the ancestral spirit world became the logical choice for a reasonable explanation. In this manner, sprits became important to man, since they can control life and death as well as bring sickness and health, abundance and poverty. The ghosts become gods, and they are feared. Their human needs and vanities, they can be influenced by offerings, sacrifices, flattery and propitiation. Thus the demand arises for specialist in the art of ritual: medicine men priests, who themselves often assume supernatural properties.”[1]
The notion of life after death was very ancient. The ancient people believed in the survival of the soul after death. For example, Neanderthal men (1,50,000 – 70,000B.C.) believed in the survival of the soul after death. There is ample evidence that they often carefully and deliberately buried their dead. “Neanderthal burials often include the careful placement of tools and animal bones, indicating that the bodies of the deceased may have received ritual treatment. Some times only the skull was preserved. Neanderthal burial was found in a cave near La Ferrasie, also in France. A man and woman were found buried side by side; near by the remains of the two children were discovered, and under a tiny mound those of a baby. In front of the graves of the children there lay the deposit of the bones and ashes.”[2] These burials make it clear that the Neanderthallers believed in the survival of the soul after death. Another example for ancient belief was found in Mesopotamia. “In Mesopotamia, in the early literate society, the royal graves at Ur (C.2500B.C.) indicate that a royal person attended in death by a retinue of servants, who were killed at the time of the burial. No doubt, the dead high born person was expected to enjoy in the life beyond the same life-style to which he had been accustomed in his earthly existence.”[3] Some times the survivors spend time, money and effort to keep the souls of the deceased as happy as possible in their other- worldly existence, so that they might have no desire to return to earth.
The purpose of this dissertation is to throw some lights on the various beliefs in eschatology. This dissertation tries to find out the reality of the life after death through the modern evidences so as to enhance the understanding of the eschatology. This dissertation is the descriptive study of eschatology. It makes an attempt to highlight the concept of eschatology by dividing the study into four chapters. The first chapter deals with the understanding of the life after death by the various religions. The second chapter enumerates the philosophers’ view on the life after death. The third chapter deals with the materialistic view of life after death. The fourth chapter objectively evaluates the same problem by authenticating it with the modern scientific evidences.
The research on this nature would not be easy to write without recourse to original sources. This research has done with the available books in the library. The researcher has quoted directly or indirectly from various authors wishes to acknowledge with grateful thanks his indebtedness. The available primary sources are: ‘Comparative Religions’: K.N. Tiwari, Motilal Banar Sidass Publishers Pvt. Ltd., Delhi; ‘Contemporary Indian Philosophy’: Basant Kumar Lal, Motilal Banar Sidass Publishers Pvt. Ltd., Delhi; ‘Philosophy of Life and Death’: M.V. Kamath, Jaico Publishing House, Mumbai. Other books consulted are detailed in the bibliography to all of whom thanks are hereby offered.
CHAPTER I
RELIGIOUS UNDERSTANDING OF THE LIFE AFTER DEATH
Introduction
There are two fundamentally different types of views on the after life 1) empirical views based on observations 2) religious views based on faith. The empirical views based on observations, which made by humans or instruments. These observations are made from research, near death experiences and out of body experiences. The religious views based on faith. Ancestors or faith in religious book like the bible the Quran, the Vedas etcetera, extracts these from stories that are told. This chapter mainly focuses on the religious views on the life after death.
1.1Hinduism
Hindu eschatology consists of the transmigration of souls from one body to another. Hinduism believes that the life of the man does not end with his physical death. The soul will remain after the death of our physical body. The body is a shell; the soul inside is immutable and indestructible. It takes on different lives in a cycle of birth and death. They claim that the end of this cycle is attaining Moksha or salvation. Hinduism had faith that the soul after death of present body has to enter into some other new body in accordance with its past deeds. It transmigrates from the old body to a new body. It has to be reborn. Sri. Ramana Maharshi says, “The self existed before the birth of this body and will remain after the death of this body. So it is with the series of bodies taken up in succession. The self is immortal. The phenomena are changeful and appear mortal. The fear of death is of the body”[4]. So death is not the end of life but it is an instrument, which helps to reincarnate the self-entering into another life. The idea of rebirth is based on the idea of Karma. According to Hinduism the basic concept of Karma is “as you sow, you shall reap”. So if we have lived a good life on the earth, we will be rewarded in the after life. Like that, the bad actions will be mirrored in the future life. Karmas generate Samskaras, which force the soul to be born again and again. Only Niskama Karma (action done with out attachment) does not generate any Samskara. Therefore the performer of this stage has not to take rebirth. He attains Moksha.
1.1.1 The Vedas (c.1500)
The Vedas speaks about the idea of heaven and hell. The Vedas believes that after death the sprit of man is sent to heaven or hell depends on their good and bad action done by him on the earth. Much is spoken of heaven and its pleasure rather than the miseries of the hell. The Vedas figures out the heaven, as there are soft, cool breezes, refreshing water, streams of milk etc. Every thing seems to be plenty. The Brahmanas pointed out that man’s deeds are weighted in a balance and people are rewarded or punished in accordance with their good and bad deeds on the earth. The righteous is separated from the unrighteous in the presence of Yama (the king of the land of the death). Rig Veda explains about various births as follows:
“I behold that the soul
Who is master of all the senses?
And possesses in exhaustible energy and strength
Enters into various births”.[5] (Rig Veda 1-164-31)
1.1.2 The Upanishads (9-5 B.C)
The doctrine of the rebirth clearly described in the Brahadaranyaka Upanishad. It distinguished three classes of soul. The first kinds of souls are librated from the round of the birth. The soul purified by the fire that has consumed its gross body passes on into the flame. The spiritual person will go to the world of Brahman from whom there is no return. The second kind of soul passes into smoke, the night, the world of fathers and finally into the moon. There it becomes food for gods, when it passes away from them; it descends into space, from space into the air, from the air into the rain and the rain onto the earth. But those who do not know these two ways become worms, moths and biting serpents.[6]
1.1.3 The Bhagavad-Gita (5-1)
The Bhagavad-Gita, which consists of teachings of the lord Krishna, says the cycle of the births and death as follows:
1) “Just as a person casts off. Worn-out garments and puts on others that are new, even so does the embodied souls cast off worn-out bodies and take on others that are new”.[7]
2) “For that which is born death is certain, and for the dead birth is certain. Therefore grieve not over that which is unavoidable”[8]
3) “On taking such a birth
Soul again revives the divine consciousness
Of his previous life,
And endeavors to make further progress
With a view to achieve salvation”.[9] (Gita 6-43)
The Bhagavad-Gita, the lord Krishna said that our body is like old clothes. When a person died, he left his body and enters into a new body like wearing new clothes. So birth and death are certain. He emphasized that no need of worrying about death.
1.2 Zoroastrianism (c.1100-500 B.C)
Zoroastrianism is the religion, which has a unique idea of the life after death. According to Zoroastrianism man has an after life in accordance with his righteous or evil action has done in the world. One, who has done the righteous action, will find a place where he enjoys with his full freedom. Those who have done evil on the earth will go to the place where they will undergo some terrible sufferings.
Zoroastrianism believes that the soul after the physical death of man remains for three days with the body and meditate upon its deeds. On the fourth day, the soul enters into the place of judgment. The archangels (Vohuman and Mithra) keep a record of every man’s deed on the earth. Apart from heaven and hell, it also speaks about the third place called purgatory where remain the souls of good and bad deeds are more or less equal. To enter into heaven and hell the soul has to cross a bridge called ‘the Chin vat Bridge’. For those who rewarded to heaven the bridge gives an easy path to cross it over and for those who punish to go to hell the bridge becomes very hard to walk as on the edge of the sword.
The eschatology of Zoroastrianism does not end. It continues its belief that the soul will remain in the heaven or hell in accordance with their deeds on earth until the world comes to its final end. At that time Ahura Mazda will wipe out all evil from the earth and establish complete good all over the world. The souls from hell will be brought out and purified. After the purification the souls will join with the heavenly souls and a new cycle of earth will begin in which there will be no evil and no misery. All souls remain forever without growing old or facing decay.[10] In this world there will be no evil but only good.
1.3 Buddhism (563-483 B.C)
According to Buddhism after the death of the present body takes another body in accordance with their merits and demerits on the earth. Those who have done an action with out attachment have not been born again and again. They attain nirvana, a state of being purely spiritual and free from all sorts of sufferings of the physical life. There are two gains out of Nirvana. They are negative and positive. If we speak in negatively that is stopping of rebirth and future misery, positively speaking attainment of peace in the life.
Buddha said that if any actions have done without the sense of attachment, which are the causes of the rebirth. But there is no rebirth for those who have been performed an action with the sense of attachment. It is like a fried seed, which does not generate any plant.
Buddhist eschatology does not speak about the heaven and hell. They claim that the process of rebirth is a continuation of the previous life. It is like a burning flame lit up another flame before blowing out. Just as the last consciousness moment of present life gives the first consciousness moment of the next life. The process of rebirth is based on our past Karma. Ignorance is the root causes of the rebirth. According to the Buddhist perspective, the current life is the continuation of the past life. If one dies with the peaceful state of mind, will enter into a state that Buddha called Amata (deathlessness). If one dies with the negative state of mind will be born lower such as an animals, birds etc. Here there is no deity for judging good and bad action of man and rewarding or punishing him in accordance with his deeds in his present life.
1.4 Jainism (580-500 B.C)
Jainism believes that man has an immortal soul within him, which does not die after death of his physical body. The soul transmigrates into a new body after the death of his physical body. The assumption of a new body fully depends on the Karmas of the previous life. According to Jainism the soul in its real nature is pure and perfect. But due to its conduct with ajiva it accumulates karma and involved in the wheel of life. The removal of Karma is possible only when Jiva is freed from the bondage of Karma and passed beyond rebirth and attained Moksa. Jiva can attain Moksa by its voluntary efforts and not depending on any deity or God. One can attain Moksa by his own efforts.
There are Gotra-Karmas and namakarmas, which determine our family of birth, bodily conditions, and economic and social status. The bad Karma leads to subhuman birth. Any action has done with less of attachment that leads to human birth. Jainism says, “The Jiva has a characteristic of Urdhvagati (a tendency to move upwards). When the soul is free from all Karmas, it moves upward to the end of Lokakasa and remains in its pure form in Siddha Loka. It does not move further because there is a absences of the Dharma Astikaya in the Alokakasa. The efforts for the attainment of Moksa are possible only for the human beings in this Karmabhumi. The final stage of the self-realization is the stage of the absolute perfection. In this stage all bodily stages are removed. Then the soul enters into the third stage of Sukladhyana. At the end of this stage the soul attains liberation.”[11]
1.5 Judaism (1900-1700 B.C)
Jewish sacred texts and literature have little to say about what happens after death. They believe in the resurrection of the dead and a world yet to come in which all the souls will be resurrected. According to Judaism the advantage of resurrection and after life is to be had only to the righteous and the wicked are to perish forever along with their physical death. Jewish people call heaven as Gan Eden [The Garden of Eden]. It is generally described as a place of great joy and peace. Talmudic imagination of Gan Eden is as sitting at golden banquet tables or at stools of gold, enjoying lavish banquets or celebrating the Sabbath, enjoying sunshine and sexual intercourse. Hell is known as Gehinnom or Sheol. It is a place of darkness and silence. The souls in Gehinnom are punished for up to twelve months. After twelve months, their body is consumed and their soul is burned and the wind scatters them under the feet of the righteous or continues to be punished. The Torah and Talmud focus on the purpose of earthly life, which is to fulfill one’s duties to God and one’s fellow man. Those who are succeeding at this, will be rewarded by God and those who are failing at it, will be punished by God. Jewish believe the messianic age. The Hebrew word ‘Olam Ha-Ba’ (the world to come) is used for referring the messianic age. Maimonides, the great Jewish thinker, says, “An after life continues for the soul of every human being, a soul now separated from the body in which it was housed during its earthly existence”. At the time of messianic age the righteous dead will be resurrected but the wicked will not be resurrected. The messianic age will be a time of peace and merry.
1.5.1 The After life in Torah
The Torah is the sacred canonical scripture for the Jew. The Torah describes the after life in a figurative way. According to it the death means rejoining one’s ancestors. “I will gather you to your ancestors, and you shall be gathered to your grave in peace” [2King22: 20]. The other view of dead is like dust returning to dust. The author of Psalm describes the suffering of the wicked in the Sheol as follows: -
“I am counted among those who go down to the pit;
I am like those who have no help,
Like those forsaken among the dead,
Like the slain that lies in the grave,
Like those whom you remember no more,
for they are cut off from your hand.
You have put me in the depths of the pit,
in the regions dark and deep.
Your wrath lies heavy upon me,
And you overwhelm me with all your waves”.
[Psalm88: 4-7]
1.6 Christianity: (c.0-33 C.E)
Christianity believes in life after death. Christianity was founded under the faith of resurrection of Jesus Christ. Christian eschatology concerns the after life, the return of Jesus, the end of the world, resurrection of the dead, last judgment and establishment of the kingdom of God. When the world comes to its final end, all the souls will reunite with their bodies and will bring before God for the final judgment. God will separate the souls according to their good and bad deeds on the earth. Those who have done an action in accordance with the teachings of Jesus are sent to heaven and those who are unrighteous and sinful are sent to hell. Pope Benedict XII says, “The pure souls of the just, who have died, see God intuitively and face to face even before the resurrection of their bodies; and immediately after death the souls of the damned descend into hell, where they are tormented by eternal punishment”.[12]
Christianity believes in two kinds of judgments, which are the universal judgment and particular judgment. The particular judgment is the judgment immediately after his physical death. The universal judgment is the final judgment, which will make at the end of the world. It is applicable to all. After this judgment the souls will go to heaven or hell in accordance with their deeds on the earth. The fourth Latern council (1215) taught that the Lord Jesus Christ would come at the end of time to judge the living and dead. All will rise with their bodies to be rewarded or punished according to their deeds. Apart from heaven and hell Christianity also have faith in Purgatory were the souls prepare themselves for the purification and will become worthy to enter into heaven. Those who are in the purgatory can enter into heaven only by offering Mass for them, praying for their release and giving arms on their behalf. No one can help the souls in the hell because they are beyond all helps.
1.6.1 Biblical View of Eschatology
Christians have belief on life after death on the basis of biblical teachings. The bible is the mirror of their faith. The bible is divided into two that is Old Testament and New Testament. The Old Testament views of death means rejoining with one’s ancestors. “Abraham breathed his last and died in a good old age, an old man and full of years, and was gathered to his people” [Gen25: 8]. The Old Testament image of the after life is as a shadowy place called Sheol. It is a place of darkness and silence, located in low place. At the time of judgment, God will reward or punish them in according to their deeds. “Many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt” [Dan12: 2].
The New Testament believes that whoever believes Jesus Christ; they will live with him in the life after death. Jesus Christ says, “Every one who lives and believes in me will never die” [John11: 26]. According to Gospel of Matthew at the death of Jesus Christ tombs were opened, and at his resurrection many saints who had died emerged from their tombs and went into the holy city. It clearly speaks about what will happen at the time of resurrection.
According to St. Paul eternal life is the gift of God and it comes through good works and faith. He also believes that the spirit of lord gives the eternal life to those who believe him. “If the spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will give life to your mortal bodies also through his spirit that dwells in you” [Rom8: 11]. St. Paul teaches that Jesus will raise us up along with him at the time of resurrection. St. Paul argues that if the dead are not raised to a new life, then Christ was not raised from the dead.
According to St. John, those who have done right shall rise to live but those who have done evil shall rise to be damned. Death is not final for those who believe in Jesus.
1.7 Islam (c.570-632 A.D)
Islam believes that Allah gives life to every creature and also gives death to every one. Allah is a cause for all birth and death. After the death of our physical body, the spiritual body remains uncorrupted till the last day when the world comes to an end. In the middle period the soul rests in a place called Al-Berzahk. No one knows the Day of Judgment. When the day comes, it will blow by the trumpet. On that day the dead rise from their graves. Their souls reunite with their bodies and are brought before Allah by his angels and those who have done merits on the earth will be rewarded by God and will go to heaven (jannah). Those who have done demerits in their life will be punished by God and will go to hell (jahannam).
Heaven and hell are graphically pictured in the Quran. Heaven is described as a rose-bed of pleasure. Hell is described as unending suffering and pain. The Quran describes heaven and hell as follows:
1) “ And give glad tiding unto those who believe and do good works; that theirs are gardens underneath which rivers flows; as often they are regaled with food of the fruits there of they say: this is what was given us to afore-time; and it is given to them in resemblance. There for them are pure companions; these forever they abide”. (2: Al-Baqurah: 25)[13]
2) “Lo! Those who disbelieve our revelations, we shall expose them to the fire. As often as their skins are consumed we shall exchange them for fresh skins that they may taste the torment Lo! Allah is ever mighty, wise”. (4: An-Nisa: 56)[14]
After the judgment one has to pass over the bridge called ‘Alsirat’. Those who are punished to go to hell the passage of the bridge like a swords edge. They could not pass through below the hell. But for those who are awarded to go to heaven (jannah), the passage of the bridge becomes wider. They can easily cross over the bridge and reach the heavenly side.
Conclusion
All the religions of the world believe in the life after death but they differ in detailed nature. All religions commonly accept that the death is not a final end. Man has life beyond death. All the religions of Indian origin (Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism) believe that after the end of the physical life, man has to take rebirth in accordance with his deeds on the earth. Every man has got a soul within him, which does not die with the physical death and transmigrates into a fresh body after the death of the present body. Those who have attained knowledge have not to be reborn after death. They attain the spiritual status of immortality and perfection.
The eschatology of the Semitic religions is more or less same idea. On the Day of Judgment, who have done the good or bad actions on the earth and sending him to heaven or hell in accordance with his deeds? These are the same idea in the Semitic religions but the way of expression differs at some points. Jewish eschatology is vague and indefinite. The Christian and Islam eschatology are very clear. Judaism believes that the sinful have no after life. They perish completely with death. It believes in final Day of Judgment on which the whole world is brought before God. Their good and bad actions are accounted there and according to it they will send to heaven or hell. Judaism does not speak about the intermediary period, which is the period between the individual death and the final Day of Judgment. Islam and Christianity are so clear about the period also. They believe in the Day of Judgment, the resurrection of the death and the allotment of heaven and hell. According to Islam the live in the place called ‘Albarzahk’ during its intermediary period. On the Day of Judgment they all resurrected and brought before Allah. After the Day of Judgment the souls will cross the bridge called ‘Alsirat’. Those who have done good things on the earth, they can easily cross the bridge but those who have done evil deeds on the earth cannot cross over it. According to Christianity, those who have done good deeds will go to the heaven but those who have done bad action will go to hell. Those who are in the middle position, they are sent to purgatory where they have repent for their sins and will go to heaven. Zoroastrian’s eschatology is unique the other Semitic religion in two aspects. First, after the death of the physical body, the soul remains the body for three days and meditates upon their own deeds. On the fourth day, they are brought before god for the final judgment. The second, the hell is not permanent those who have done evil on the earth. The hell is a temporary place for them till Ahura Mazda will refresh the world by destroying all evils and makes it good in everywhere. After that all souls equally become the member of the same world. So, from the religious point of view, man is eternal and has the life after death.
CHAPTER II
FEW PHILOSOPHERS VIEWS ON THE LIFE AFTER DEATH
Introduction
According to Aristotle, man is a rational animal. The philosophers are those who look into the reality in the rational way. Even though, they are the philosophers, their arguments of eschatology are based on their religions in which they belong. They explain their arguments from the day-to-day life of the ordinary human beings. So that, all human beings can understands the immortality of the soul. This is an unsolvable problem to the philosophers to give the scientific proofs for the immortality of the soul. They tried their level best to prove this mystery in the rational way. There are many philosophers who speak about eschatology. But this chapter enumerates few philosophers view on the life after death.
2.1 PLATO (c.427-347 B.C)
Plato believes in the immortality of the soul. He explained the immortality of the soul in the entire dialogue of ‘Phaedo’ in which he formulated a rational understanding of the immortality of the soul. According to Plato, death is the separation of the soul from the body; but it is not the end of the soul. Plato believes in metempsychosis, which means the transmigration of the soul from the one living being to another, and in the resurrection, the rebirth of the soul in the new body. So, the life is the one of the preparation for the death. At the time of death the soul separates from the body. Plato argues that the knowledge of the importance matters of the life is clearest to the soul alone; the attachment to the mortal body is only the distraction of the soul. He believes that the soul cannot be destroyed intrinsically or extrinsically. The soul can be destroyed by an external evil. Plato says, “The just and foolish man, when he is detached, perishes through his own injustice, which is an evil of the soul”[15]. Plato was inspired by Socrates idea of proving the immortality of the soul. Plato argues as follow:
2.1.1 The cycle of opposition
This argument is based on the contraries. Every quality comes into being from its own opposite. The contraries are produced from the contraries. For example, hot comes from the cold and the cold from the hot. The hot things are just cold things that have warmed up, and the cold things are just hot things that have cooled off. The life comes from the death. Therefore out of death comes life. In his point of view, the people who are dead, they were alive but then experienced the transition we call dying, and the people who are alive, they were among the dead but then experienced the transition we call being born. Plato says, “Now it is true that the living come from the dead, then our souls exist in the other world, for it is not, how they could be born again? Are not all things, which have opposites, generated out of their opposites? I mean such things as good and evil, just and unjust-and there are innumerable other opposites which are generated out of opposites. And I want to show that in all opposites there is of necessity a similar alternation, I mean to say, for example, that anything, which becomes greater must become greater after being less… And that which becomes less must have been once greater and then have become less… Is there not opposite of life, as sleep is the opposite of waking... Is not death opposite to life?”[16]
2.1.2 The recollection argument
This argument explains that we posses some non- empirical knowledge at birth. The soul existed before the birth to carry that knowledge. If the soul existed before the body, it is natural that it will exist after the body. Our knowledge is a recollection, which we have learned that which we now recollect. It is impossible unless our soul had had been in some place before existing in the form of man.
2.1.3 Resemblance Argument
The soul has a spiritual and divine nature. All the visible things are subject to dissolution. But the soul is invisible and intangible, so it is not subject to dissolution. Plato says, “now the compound or composite may be may be supposed to be naturally capable, as of being compounded, so also of being dissolved, but that which is uncompounded, and that only, must be, if anything is, indissoluble… And the uncompounded may be assumed to be the same and unchanging, whereas the compound is always changing and never the same.”[17]
The above-mentioned arguments show that the soul does not perish after the death. When Plato speaks of immortality and indestructibility of the soul, he does not mean that every part of the soul to be immortal. But our rational part remains imperishable.
2.2. ST.THOMAS AQUINAS (1225-1274 A.D)
St. Thomas Aquinas believes in the resurrection of the body after our death and those who have risen from the death will see God face to face. He quoted the scripture in orders to strengthen his idea. “I know that my redeemer lives and that at the last he will stand upon the earth; and after my skin has been thus destroyed, then in my flesh I shall see God” (Job 19:25, 26). God is the cause of the resurrection of the bodies. St. Thomas Aquinas calls the resurrection of Christ the quasi-instrumental cause through which God will rise up our bodies. On the last day, Christ will appear in his glory and will summon all men to resurrection and judgment. The angels will gather all the resurrected soul. But angels will not do the actual reuniting of the souls and bodies, but it will be the immediate work of God himself.
The resurrection of the body will take place at the end of the world. The end of time will not be known to any one expect God. Scripture says, “But about the day and hour no one knows, neither the angel of the heaven, nor the son, but only the father” (Mat 24:36). Many people think that the resurrection of the body will take place at night when Christ arose from the dead. The resurrection of the body will take place in an instant, and not by degrees. St. Paul says, “In moment, in twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will rise imperishable, and we will be changed” (1Cor 15:52)
St. Thomas Aquinas thought that the risen body will have the development of a person thirty years old at which they arrive maturity and full development. All the risen body will not have the same size; each one will have the suitable size. The risen bodies will not eat, or drink, or sleep, or beget offspring. After the resurrection, the bodies of saints will protect from suffering substantial changes. But the body of the wicked people will go to hell where they will undergo such terrible sufferings. The glorified body will be able to move with the quickness of thought from place to place under the direction of the soul and the commands of the free will. This quality of risen body is called agility. The scripture says, “Those who wait for the Lord shall renew their strength, they shall mount up with wings like eagles, they shall run and not be weary, they shall walk and not faint” (Is 40:31). The glorified body will have a certain luminous quality, which St.Thomas calls clarity. This clarity is the result of the overflow of the soul’s glory into the body. This clarity will be visible to the non-glorified eye of damned.
Each man is judged immediately after his death. It is called particular judgment. The universal judgment is the final judgment, which will make at the end of the world. At the time of final judgment, Christ will appear among the glorified body and will judge according to their deeds on the earth. The scripture says, “For all of us will appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each may receive recompense for what has been done in the body, whether good or evil” (2 Cor 5:10). St. Thomas Aquinas believes that the final judgment will be, not by the words of mouth, but mentally.
St. Aquinas believes in limbo and purgatory. “The limbo is a place where the soul of unbaptized children remains because of their original sin. These infants are not wholly separated from God; they are united to him by their nature and its gifts. They continually rejoice in God by natural knowledge and love”.[18]
The purgatory is a place where the souls of venial sins will be punished temporally. “Purgatory is situated near hell, so that it is the same fire which torments the damned in hell and cleanses the just in purgatory”.[19] After their punishment, these souls will join the eternal bliss.
2.3 SWAMI VIVEKANANDA (1863-1902)
Literally immortality means deathlessness. The death is not the end of the soul. The soul will survive after our death. Vivekananda said that it is not possible to give an exact scientific demonstration of the soul’s immortality. But he also believes that these beliefs cannot be treated as an unscientific belief. He explains about the nature of immortality as such, “Often in the turmoil and struggle of our lives we seem to forget it, but suddenly some one dies –one, perhaps whom we loved, one near and dear to our hearts, is snatched away from us- and the struggle, the din and turmoil of the world around us cease for a moment and the soul asks the old question, “what after this?” “What becomes of the soul?”[20]
Vivekananda believes the survival of the soul after death, rebirth, and the ultimate realization of immortality of the soul and of complete freedom. He thought that rebirth is the aspect of immortality and the ultimate realization of immortality will be getting out not only of this world but also the cycle of birth and rebirth.
He explains the difference between the survivals of the soul immortality of the soul. Survival means that the death is not the end of life. He explains this through the doctrine of ignorance and Karma. He says, “the soul performs action in ignorance, certain tendencies and Samskaras are created in accordance with whish the next birth is determined.”[21] He believes that the true immortality can be attained only when this cycle is finally stopped .the immortality is a prize to be won. This can be realized only by strenuous and persistence effort. He explains the realization of immortality of the soul by taking into the account of the growth of seed and the growth of the child. “The seed grows into a tree only because the tree is already potentially contained in the seed. The child grows into an adult only because the child is potentially the adult.”[22] Like that the soul is able to realize immortality because the soul is immortal. The immortality is hidden in him, the soul is not aware of it because still it is in ignorance. The soul has to be made aware; the hidden elements of immortality have to be fully manifested. That will be the realization of immortality. He says that it is like finding the lost necklace on one’s own neck. All time man searches for it but it is there with him.
2.3.1 Evidences for the immortality of soul
Vivekananda offers certain evidences for the immortality of soul, which are as follows:
1) the most popular evidences is that the argument based on the simplicity of the soul. He says, “What is liable to destruction is invariably something composite, because the destruction means breaking the whole into its parts. The soul being simple is part less and therefore, the question of its destruction does not arise”.[23]
2) The another evidence of the immortality of the soul comes from the analysis of the power and capacities which are hidden in man. In the hours of need and emergency man is able to do any thing even which he thinks the impossible. He has the capacity to do every thing but he does not realize his inner potentiality. Man has the growth of continuous progression. This development makes us to believe that the process continuous even after death. No can imagine his own mortality. This inability of imagines our own mortality is an evidence of immortal life. Vivekananda says, “Even to imagine my own annihilation I shall have to stand by and look as a witness.”[24]
2.4 MAHATMA GANDHI (1869- 1948)
Gandhi believes in rebirth. His beliefs on rebirth are based on Hindu beliefs and tradition. Hinduism believes that the soul will remain after the death of our physical body. The body is a shell; the soul inside is immutable and indestructible. It takes on different lives in a cycle of birth and death. They claim that the end of this cycle is attaining Moksha or Salvation. Hinduism had faith that the soul after death of present body has to enter into some other new body in accordance with its past deeds. Gandhi believes all these doctrine of Hinduism but he gives a moral interpretation to this doctrine by emphasizing the ethical value of this belief. He feels that by believing in the possibility of rebirth one is able to make adjustment s with life. This belief makes man to be loving, kind, moral and benevolent even in the midst of his bitter experiences of jealously and hatred. The life is not a bed of roses. It is the mixture of struggle, hardship, suffering and happiness. If there are no such beliefs on rebirth, individual may break down all the moralities for his own sake. Because of this belief in rebirth, he realizes that this world is not the end of everything and whatever we have done on the earth, will reflect in the future life also. Evil and sufferings is not the final. This realization gives strength to man and gives courage to face all the problems in his life. Therefore he becomes a pious, moral and noble living.
His belief in rebirth is based on the belief in Karma. It is taken to be both a metaphysical and a moral law. Metaphysically speaking, this law of Karma explains births and formation of bodies. Our present life is based on our past Karmas. The law of Karma is considered as a moral law because it is also considered our good and bad actions on the earth. Gandhi says, “Every individual is unique because of his peculiar physical and mental inheritance and equipment. What an individual now ism, is the effect of his actions – his habits of thinking, feeling, speaking and acting in the past. Man makes himself through all these diverse activities, internal and external. They appear to be so insignificant separately, but taken together they create the tremendous forces that shape his health, character, and his entire destiny.”[25] The moral law of Karma is more important because it determines our future life. Man is the maker of his own destiny. An individual is going to make himself a good man or an immoral man. Gandhi thinks that this type of realization will create in man a sense of responsibility in man.
2.5 RADHAKRISHNAN (1889-1975)
Radhakrishnan believes the rebirth. The most general idea of rejection of rebirth is that there is no evidence of anybody having any memory of the past life. Radhakrishnan says, “Lack of memory about the past life is not an adequate ground for rejecting the belief in rebirth. No body has any memory of his existences in his mother’s womb, but that does not mean that that is not a state of existence. Death puts an end to the memory – capacity, but sufficient evidences of the tendencies of the past are available in life”.[26]According to him, rebirth in means survival and it is a fact. Rebirth is the essential for the realization of the different possibilities lf existence. Radhakrishnan does not take the following evidences for rebirth.
1) Everything in the universe comes out of its own past historical growth and it will further develop in future. There is continuity in these things. The selves also have their previous inherited quality in the present life. They also carry their acquired disposition in their future life. If there is continuity in each and every thing in nature, there is no exception for the selves to be existed in the future. Therefore, we come to know that the selves had their past existence and will give also future ones.
2) If the selves are created with the birth of the body and are destroyed with the death, then our education and experience become useless. If the pre-existence of self is denied, then we cannot explain the different nature of the selves. The different between one and other is due to the rich or poor experiences with which the selves are born. The different characteristic is due to their past inheritance. Selves incarnated in men, beasts, birds and insects. They have different organizations, functions and nature.
3) Some are born with excellence. This in born perfection is acquired in the previous life. If we observe a certain stages of development we acquire in past. For example, in the case lovers, if the love comes at first sight between two persons, it is because the souls had previous affection with each other in their previous lives. There facts reveal that the souls had previous existence and also have the future life.
Radhakrishna says, “It is invested in a finer vehicle, the subtle body (suksma Sarira) when It leaves the gross one. The subtle body secures the necessary physical basis. The subtle body, which is said to accompany one through out, one’s empirical existence, is the form on which the physical body is molded. It is this which assumes the body necessary for its efficiency at its next birth by attracting physical elements to itself.”[27]He points out that the transmigration of a self from one body to another takes place with the subtle body. The self with the subtle body enters into a new physical body. Therefore, the character of the self continues from existence to another.
Rebirth is not meaningless but it has a purpose and meaning. The purpose of rebirth is to make the soul perfect. The self is imperfect to day and it moves on perpetually for fulfillment and perfection. So, as long as the self remains imperfect, its evolution is a continuous process.
Conclusion
The western and eastern philosopher’s argue that the death is not the end. After the death our life will continue in another form. Plato explains his view on immortality of soul from the cycle of opposition. The contraries are produced from the contraries. Life comes from the death. Therefore, out of death comes life. St. Thomas Aquinas explains the immortality of the soul from his religious belief. He argues that God will rise up our bodies along with his resurrection. Swami Vivekananda says that it is like finding the lost necklace on one’s own neck. The immortality is the nature of the soul but we are not aware of it. When the soul is able to realize it nature then it will liberate form ignorance. Mahatma Gandhi’s view if the immortality of soul is based on Hindu beliefs. He interprets it by emphasizing the ethical value of this belief. He feels that by believing the rebirth one can make adjustment with life and gives courage to face all the problems in his life. So that, he becomes pious, moral and noble living in the world. Radhakrishnan says that the rejection of rebirth is that there is no evidence anybody having the memory of the past life. He further explains that nobody has the memory of the existence in his mother’s womb but it does not mean that it is not a state of existence. So, the soul exists before our birth but we do not have the memory of the past life.
CHAPTER III
THE CRITICAL APPROACH TO THE IMMORTALITY OF SOUL
Introduction
Do people live after death? This question has been asked since the dawn of the civilization. There are two possible answers to it. Either human being will live after the death or they will not live after their death. Immortality is a complex issue dependent on several other philosophical questions. There are many other theories, which deny the life after death and also there are many arguments for proving the existences of the soul after death. The purpose of this chapter is to have the critical look on the immortality of the soul both positively as well as negatively. Positively, this chapter brings out the possible arguments for the immortality of the soul. On the other hand, it brings out the reasons for the denial of immortality of the soul and its criticism.
3.1 Arguments for the immortality of soul
3.1.1 Argument on the basis of science
From the viewpoint of science the word immortality means deathlessness or the state, which is not subject to death. Science has proved that matter and energy are indestructible. So, every particle of matter is not subject to absolute destruction or death, in this sense, we must say that matter is immortal, energy is immortal, force is immortal, because they are not subject to destruction. Matter and energy of this universe remain constant, which can neither be increased nor diminished. For instance, any material object when consumed by fire will exhibit an identical quantity both before and after its consumption by fire. Similarly destruction of the body does not involve the destruction of the soul.[28]
3.1.2 Arguments on the basis of knowledge
Knowledge of the person depends on the feeling, willing and thinking. We can transcend the limitation of time and space by our intelligence. Thought is not limited like willing. In memory, we dive deep into the remote past, and in imagination we go forward in the very distant future. Thus through our memory power we can know our previous life, and the same time anticipate the future happenings of the self. This implies the immortality of the soul and its never-ending continuation. The science of astrology can provide us sufficient material regarding the past and the future activities of the soul. No doubt our body is destroyed but the soul remains immortal.
3.1.3 Metaphysical arguments
Plato conceived the soul as a substantial reality, which is simple in structure. As simple substance, the soul is destructible. A composite substance is subject to dissolution, but the simple a substance must be imperishable. Plato believed that the soul is of the divine essence and is therefore is immortal. It is eternal in nature. So, according to Plato the idea of soul is free from dissolution and death.
Descartes stated that the soul is a substance of the pure consciousness. The consciousness is indestructible and imperishable. Spinoza holds that man is immortal only insofar as he participates in the life of pure reason independent of sensibility. The physical body, which consists of soul, becomes immortal if it free from passions and prejudices. That soul is eternal and immortal which gets the intellectual love of God.
According to Leibniz, the soul is imperishable and can never die out for it will involve a break in a continuity of reality. Leibniz says, “Death is only apparent, not real”.
According to Kant, “Our moral law is a categorical imperative which demands unconditional obedience from man. It is a priori and not derived from experiences. It is free from empirical factors. This categorical imperative is the universal moral law, which is not connected with any external ends. The summum bonum of the highest good is the nature and end of the soul. Since the complete realization of the highest good is the destiny of the highest spirit, it implies the continuation of the existences of the soul for the attainment of the summum bonum”. So, according to Kant’s metaphysical and moral doctrine, the soul is immortal.
3.1.4 Moral Argument
G.E.Moore maintains that all ethical propositions are based on the notion of good. Moore says, “The good has no definition because it is simple and has no parts. The concept of good is un-analyzable, which is similar to the concept of soul. Like good, the soul is simple one. It cannot be destroyed. The soul is eternal and immortal”[29]. Kant says that if the man’s rational implies the possibility of realizing the summum bonum it is possible only on the supposition of a supreme moral being of God, who is immortal like the soul.
3.1.5 Religio- Philosophical Argument
Hinduism, Christianity and Islam uphold the theories of the immortality of the soul. The followers of these religions believe that the souls were created out of nothingness. But they will have to enjoy or suffer all throughout eternity. If these souls exist today and they will continue to exist throughout the eternity. They must have existed from eternity.
According to Hinduism, the true nature of soul is Atman. Sri Krishna said to Arjuna in Gita, “The Atman is neither born nor does it die. Coming into being and ceasing to be do not take place in it; unborn, eternal, constant, and ancient, it is not killed when the body is slain”.[30] The soul is indestructible, eternal, unborn and changeless. The soul is eternal, all pervading, stable, immovable and everlasting.
In Advaita-Vedanta, Atman is the same as Brahman. It is pure consciousness. It is the only reality. As Brahman, the Atman is pure existence and consciousness is one. But ultimately Atman is devoid of all characteristics. Thus in Advaitism, to be immortal is to be one with the absolute reality of Brahman, to realize the identity between Atman and Brahman in a state, which is the independent of all limitations and empirical determinations. Immortality is the complete transcendence of all determinations. Similarly in Samkhya the attainment of immortality means a long process of culture and purification of the self. Thus all the Religio- philosophical systems aim to lead the human mind to believe that the soul is eternal, that it continues to exist after death.
3.2 Arguments against the immortality of the soul
3.2.1 Epicurus (341-270 B.C)
Epicurus was the founder father of the philosophy known as Epicureanism. He says, “Death the most dreaded of evils, is… of no concern to us, for while we exist death. Is not present, and when death is present we no longer exist”.[31] Epicures believed that fear of death was one of the main reasons for human unhappiness and he said that the fear had two sources,
a) Fear that dying will be painful.
b) Fear of a terrible after life to be afflicted by the Gods.
He said that dying might be painful, but it was soon over. There was no life after death and thus no hell. Since we would not be there to experience anything, we should no more fear death than we should fear falling asleep.
His arguments can be stated in logical forms as follows:
1) ‘At all times, either I exist or I am dead.
2) When I exist, I am not dead.
3) When I am not dead, my death is of no concern to me.
4) Therefore, when I exist, my death is of no concern to me.
5) When I am dead, I do not exist.
6) When I do not exist, my death is of no concern to me.
7) Therefore, when I am dead, my death is of no concern to me.
8) Therefore, at no time is my death of concern to me.’[32]
Epicurus claimed that something was bad for me only if I experienced it. Since I did not experience the state of being dead is not bad for me. Epicurus brought out the reason for the fear of death.
a) Some fear death because it was unknown.
b) Some fear death because they would have face it alone.
c) Some fear death because it separated from their friends and their loved ones.
d) Some fear death because their hopes and goals for the future would remain unattained.
e) Some fear death because they suspected their loved ones might fare badly after they were gone.
f) Some fear death because they believed that it annihilates them.
Criticism
1) “Things that I do not experience can be bad for me”, says Epicurus. This seems to be false because it is impossible to experience everything. We cannot experience certain things. It does not mean that it is bad. For example, I am fired from my job because of my decision that was made at a meeting, which was held without my knowledge. Then the meeting was bad for me even though I did not experience it.
2) He may be correct in his argument that there is no life after death but he is wrong in his thinking. His argument could overcome the human fear of death. For many people, the fear of non-being, no longer existing are the main reasons for the fear of death.
3.2.2 David Hume (1711-1776)
There are innumerable arguments which have been explained the arguments against the notion of immortality of soul by the materialist. These arguments are material in nature. So, these arguments are called the arguments from the analogy of nature. Hume rejected the concept of immortality of soul.
First he explains when two objects are closely connected that brings some equal change in the other objects. When the change is so great in the former that it totally dissolved, there will be total dissolution of the later. If we relate this concept to our bodies and minds, it is clear that changes in our bodies produce proposinate changes in our minds. For examples, a small pains leads to minimal mental confusion while great pain leads to total mental collapse. The total dissolution of the body at the time of death is accompanied by the total dissolution of the mind.
The second analogy has taken from the nature, which he has drawn from the fact that no form in the nature can survive, if it is transferred from its original environment to a different environment. For example, trees cannot exist in water any more than the fish can live in the air. Just like, a slight change in atmosphere would make our life impossible on this planet. If the earth were the relatively small distance closer to the sun, all life will be burned from our planet. If it is so, what reason is there to suppose that our soul or mind can survive such a radical change as the dissolution of our body?
Hume constitutes a third analogy from the similarity from the anatomy between animals and men. From the comparative anatomy we learn that animals resemble men. Is it not natural to assume that there is also the resemblance between the souls of animals and of human? If it is so, then animals also are immortal but the immortalists claim that all the animals and plants are mortal, only the human beings have the immortal life. Hume argues that both animals and human beings are not immortal. They are mortal beings.
Criticism
1) The first analogy is grounded in the interrelatedness of body and soul. He claims that a change in the one will bring about proposinate change in the other. This analogy assumes an inter-actionist view of the relationship of mind or soul to body. Many philosophers reject this solution to mind and body problem. This analogy presupposes that a change in one element will bring about a proportionate change in the other. Hume’s assumes that the proposinate response in the mind or soul to the dissolution of the body would be the corresponding dissolution of the soul. But why should this be? Is this a logical necessity? Is there empirical evidence in the support of Hume’s contention? To gain that kind of evidences one would have to experience death. It is not necessities that while the body dissolved the soul also to be dissolved. Our body has the quality of mortal but our soul has the quality of immortal. So, there is no evidence for Hume’s arguments against the immortality of the soul.
2) The second analogy, that man soul cannot survive an environmental change, as trees cannot live in water and fishes cannot live in the air. Hume simply assumes that the soul man is incapable of existence when the body is dissolved. Hume has no empirical evidence of what happens to a human being’s soul after he dies, although such evidence is readily available for a submerged tree or a fish in air. Suppose that we saw a frog when it was in the water, we conclude that the frogs cannot exist in the land. But this would be a false observation. Most animals are fit either for land or for water. The frogs can exist both in the land and in the water.
3) The third analogy, has taken from comparative anatomy (what is true of animals will be true of human beings because they resembles one another in certain ways) is surely false. Resemblance or similarity is not identity. The analogies are weak where there are great differences. Whatever is applicable to animals; need not to be applicable to human beings because human beings are superior to the animals. So, the differences between the human beings and animals make grave doubt on Hume’s analogy.
3.2.3 Karl Marx (1818-1883)
Marx’s materialist concept of the denial of immortality of soul is based on the communist interpretation of religion. Marxism insists that philosophy is based upon the knowledge derived from an analysis of reality; the true philosophy of religion is the product of investigation on religion. The belief in immortality of soul is connected with religion.
Marx developed the concept of denial of immortality from the early civilization of the society. He says, “From the very times men, still completely ignorant of the structure of their own bodies, under the stimulus of dream apparitions came to believe that their thinking and sensation were not activities of their bodies, but of the distinct soul which inhabits the body and leaves it at death-from this time men have been driven to reflect about the relation between this soul and outside the world. If upon death it took leave of the body and lived on, there was no occasion to invent yet another distinct death for it. Thus arose the idea of its immortality, which at the stage of development appeared not at all as a consolation but as a fate against which it was no use fighting, and often enough, as among the Greeks, as a positive misfortune. Not religious desire for consolation, but the quandary arising from the common universal ignorance of what to do with soul, once its existence had been accepted, after the death of the body, led in general way to the tedious notion of personal immortality”.[33]
Man in the present capitalist society of economical explanation creates religious ideas, which escape him from the hopelessness of a life of economical slavery. Man instinctively created the concept of immortality in order to escape himself from the fear of inevitable death.
Criticism
Marx looks at the immortality in the materialist way. He claims that the concept of immortality of soul comes from the early-uncivilized society, in that period, our thinking and sensation had not been well developed. Yes, it is true that the concept of immortality of soul came from the early-uncivilized society but even in the modern civilization, people hold the same notion on the immortality of soul. There are some evidences for the life after death. So, we cannot deny the concept the life after death.
3.2.4 Bertrand Russell (1872-1970)
Bertrand Russell rejected the concept of the existence of the soul after death. He argues, “The matter of the body continually changing by the process of nutriment and wastage. Atoms in the physics are no longer supposed to have continues existence; there is no sense in saying: this is the same atom as the one that existed a few minutes ago. The continuity of a human body is matter of appearance and behaviors, not of substance. The same things apply to the mind. We thing and feel and act, but there is not, in addition to thoughts and feelings and actions, a bare entity. The mind or the soul suffers these occurrences. The mental continuity of a person is a person is a continuity of habit and memory: there was yesterday one person whose feelings I can remember, and that person I regard as myself of yesterday; but, infact, myself of yesterday was only certain mental occurrences which are now remembered and are regarded as part of the person who now recollects them. All that constitute a person is a series of experiences connected by memory and by certain similarities of the sort we call habit. If therefore, we are to believe that a person survives after death, we must believe that the memories and habits, which constitute the person, will continue to be exhibited in a new set of occurrences. But no one can prove it.”[34]
He further argues that all the arguments, which support the life after death, are not the rational arguments but they based on emotions that cause belief in a future life. He explains his arguments from the dawn of the history. He says, “The most important of these emotions is fear of death, which is instinctive and biological useful. If we genuinely and whole-heartedly believed in the future life, we should cease completely to fear death. The effects will be curious, and probably such as most of us would deplore. But our human and subhuman ancestor have fought and exterminated their enemies throughout many geological ages and have profited by courage; it is therefore an advantage to the victors in the struggle for life to be able, on occasion, to overcome the natural fear of death. Among animals and savages, instinctive pugnacity suffices for this purpose; but at a certain stage of development, as the Mohammedans first proved, belief in paradise has considerable military value as reinforcing natural pugnacity. We should therefore admit that militarists are wise in encouraging the belief in immortality, always supposing that this belief does not become so profound as to product indifference to the affairs of the world.”[35]
Bertrand Russell rejects the right and wrong arguments, which is the one of the arguments for supporting the immortality of soul. He says, “We can not say that man knows right and wrong, but only that some men do- which men? Nietzsche argued in favor of ethic profoundly different from Christ’s and some powerful governments have accepted his teaching. If the knowledge of right and wrong is to be an argument for immortality, we must first settle whether to believe Christ or Nietzsche, and then argue that Christians are immortal, but Hitler and Mussolini are not, or vice versa. The decision will obviously be made on the battlefield, not in study. Those who have the best poison gas will have the ethic of the future and will therefore be the immortal ones.”[36]
Criticism
1) It is true that in our present existence the function of our minds is some how dependent on our bodies. We can all recall instances where we were unable to think well because of our state of our physical bodies. It is not necessary to the soul to carry all the memories to the future life. Because our memory needs only to this present life, it is not needed to the future life. It could be that the conditions of those existences are quite different from those of this present life.
2) The concept of the existence of the soul comes not merely from emotions but there are some evidences for the existences of the soul after death.
3) God is the supreme judge over all the things. We are interested in seeing the deeds of the man but failed to see his inner consciences. Our understanding of right and wrong depend on only the external things. We cannot certify any person as good by seeing his outward actions. We must go deeper to look his inner feelings. So, in that sense, his right and wrong argument is not a logical one.
3.2.5 Flew’s Argument
Antony Flew argues that the notion of life after death is not logically clear. They are incoherent in their argument. He offers two related arguments for non- accepting the immortality of soul. First, ‘we all have survived death’ is the self-contradictory. For example, in an airplane crash, there are two main categories, the death and survivors. If anybody dies in that crash, the first question is ‘whether the particular person survives or death?’ we cannot say that the particular person is dead but he survives. If you say this answer, it is illogical. There is only one possible that either he may die or he may live. According to Flew ‘we all of us survives death’ has not a clear meaning in itself. So it is an invalid argument.
Second, statement is ‘we all of us live forever’. This statement is empirically false. Flew says, “The paradigm true statement through out the history of logic is the statement all men are mortal. This generalization is as massively confirmed as any generalization can possible be, and it is the flat contrary of we all of us live forever.”[37] He furthermore argues that what it would be like to witness my own funeral? This is imaginable. It is possible us to imagine my funeral- I am in the casket, my mother is crying, a priest is offering prayers etc. but this imagination does not help us to accept the life after death. If it is really my funeral, then I cannot witness my funeral because I am dead in the coffin.
Criticism
1) Flew raised a question against the immortality of the soul, ‘in an airplane crash, whether the particular individual survives or death?’ To answer to this question, we must understand the difference between the soul and body. The soul is superior that our body. Our body depend on the soul but it is not necessary to the soul depends on our body. So that, during the death, our body is unable to carry the soul and our body is destructed but not the soul. So, in the case of airplane crash, if any one survives with the body and soul, then we can call him as a living person. If the body is without the soul, then he will be called as a death person.
2) In his second argument, he emphasis that all men are mortal. Yes, it is true that all men are mortal. It means, all our bodies are mortal but our soul is immortal.
Conclusion
The soul is the infinite and immortal. It is beyond space, time and causation. Being simple, it can die, not it can take any form. Soul is not a force, neither is it thought. It is the manufacturer of thought, but not thought itself. It is not the body, nor the sensation. It is ever free and omnipresent.
According to Advaita philosophy, there is only one thing is real in the universe, which is called Brahman. According to this philosophy, each man consist of three parts- the body, the mind and the self (Atman). Atman (the soul) is only existence in the human body, which is immaterial. Because it is immaterial, it cannot be compound, it does not obey the law of cause and effect, and so it is immortal. So, after the death of our body, our soul will go to God from whom it came from. It is like, the electricity, which comes, out of the dynamo, completes the circuit, and returns to it. The soul is projected from God, it passes through all sorts of human forms, and at last it is in man, and man is in the nearest approach to God.
CHAPTER IV
EVIDENCES FOR THE IMMORTALITY OF SOUL
Introduction
Experiences of coming back to earthly life are the rare case in the history. There are many researchers who have interested on this subject brought some evidences for the existence of the soul after our physical death. They have revealed only the anatomical and psychological aspects in a scientific manner based on their observation. The experiences they studied fell into three distinct categories: a) the experiences of persons who were resuscitated after having been thought, adjusted, or pronounced clinically dead by their doctors. b) The experiences of the persons who, in the course of accidents or severe injury or illness, came very close to physical death. c) The experience of the persons who, as they died, told them to other people who were present. The purpose of this chapter is to bring out knowledge about life after death, from which we will be very much enriched by understanding the true records in which world-famous doctors have explained. What they have actually seen in cases where people who were declared clinically dead have come back to life. The following recorded incidents are taken from the various books. The most uncommon and marvelous incidents are as follows:
4.1 Scientific Case of Existence of Human Soul
1) A well-known psychiatrist Dr. Elizabeth Kubler-Ross interviewed people those who have experienced a clinical form of defined death. Dr. Kubler-Ross described those three components common to these death experiences a) a sense of the soul floating out of the body. b) Feeling of peace and wholesomeness .c) a meeting with someone who had previously dead. Dr. Kubler-Ross Mrs. Barbara Pryor, the wife of Arkansas Governor, David Pryor.
“Mrs. Pryor suffered a pulmonary embolism-a blood clot in her lungs-following an emergency hysterectomy in a Washington Hospital on Thanksgiving Day 1971. The physician in attendance was one Dr. Donald Payne. Before Mrs. Pryor slipped into unconsciousness she saw a look of fear come over the Doctor’s face. She says, “My spirit started to rise in the air. I was so at peace. The feeling was magnificent. I could see my body on the bed and knew it once belonged to me. But I felt completely detached from it. I didn’t care what happened to my body.”
Dr. Payne was shouting at his nurses “code blue! Code blue! -An emergency code, which meant that a life was at stake. Later Dr. Payne recalled that he was beating on Mrs. Pryor’s chest and giving her an external cardiac massage. Mrs. Pryor said she watched the frantic activity while her spirit floated above the room, which was rapidly filling up with nurses and other doctors.
Mrs. Pryor says, “I remember thinking’, why are you working so hard? I am completely and utterly happy’. A man I had never seen before came to my body and administered a short to the heart. When he finished a nurse rushed to the bed and in her haste knocked over the pole holding the bottles of intravenous fluid. I watched the pole fall on the bed and saw one of the bottles hit the side of my body’s face. But I did not care. I was free of all pain everything that was going on below me in the room seemed to have nothing to do with me. Then I had the strangest feeling that at any second I would find my brother, who had died the year before of leukemia, right next to me. I was just about to see my brother when I looked down again and saw Dr. Payne massaging my body’s chest. In an pleading voice, he said, ‘breath Barbara, breath’ I remember saying to myself ‘oh no, I won’t. You cannot make me breath. You can not make me to leave this paradise.’ Just as I said that, a searing pain rushed through my chest and instinctively I knew that I had returned to my body. I felt trapped and angered for being forced to return. If there had been any way to stop the doctors, I would have done it. When I woke up, life-supporting machines were all around me and there was a painful black and blue welt around my eye. The nurse confirmed what I already knew – another nurse had knocked over the intravenous bottle, which had struck, at the side of my head. My out-of- body experience was wonderful. Now I know there is nothing to fear from death. I know there is really something else-peace and tranquility like I have never known on earth”.[38]
2) Dr. George Ritchie, a psychiatrist who has said that after he was declared clinically dead back in 1943. He underwent a life after life experience for a full nine minutes. Dr. George Ritchie narrated his experience of life after life as follows:
“There is apparently no question that Ritchie was pronounced dead. He has the hospital staff’s sworn testimony on that, including one doctor’s additional opinion that Ritchie’s virtual call from death and return to vigorous health has to be explained in terms other than natural means”.
This incident had happened in December 1943. Ritchie was hospitalized with pneumonia. His condition worsened day by day. After a week in bed he finally collapsed with a 106.5-degree fever. Twenty-four hours later he was discovered no signs of life and was pronounced dead. About nine minutes later, the hospital ward boy who discovered Ritchie dead, thought he was the young enlisted man move. But the doctor again declared him dead but just to be sure gave a shot of adrenalin. At that instant, Ritchie’s vital signs returned. What happened to Ritchie during those intervening nine minutes has been described in great detail. He had feelings of peace, hearing noise, leaving the human body, seeing a being of light, seeing a panoramic review, of one’s life and approaching a border or limit. Before he fell ill, Ritchie had bee scheduled to go to Richmond to complete medical studies at medical college of Virginia and now dead his instinct was rush to Richmond. This is how he related his experiences:
“I sat up on the side of the bed in the little isolation room. In the process of trying to find my uniform I looked back on the bed and there was this body lying there. But I didn’t have time to think about that. I had one thing on my mind. I knew that I had missed my train. I knew I had to get back to Richmond. So I came on out, I am going back to Richmond and I see this ward boy coming up with tray. I turned to tell him to watch where he is going and he either walked through me or I through him. I did not have time to think about that either. Now I know this sounds ridiculous. I got outside and swoosh, man; I am traveling with something approaching the seed of sound, about a hundred to five hundred feet above the trees. Suddenly I am crossing the large river and I see this little town. There is this lone guy coming down the street; they’re this all night café on the corner. So I sit down on the sidewalk to neither ask nor see me. So, I thought, well, I will tap him on the side of his cheek to get his attention. And I went through him. Suddenly it hit me that I had left my body back there in the bed. I knew there was not any sense of going further…. just as fast as I left, I got back there…”
But before he could re-enter the body, Ritchie was confronted with a light, the intensity of which was so great, it was like turning on a million welders’ light”. Out that light stepped another form of sheer light and at that point, the hospital wall disappeared and every single thing that had ever happen to me from the time I was born was there in panoramic view.”[39]
3) The third evidence from the famous book “life after life” written by Dr. Raymond A. Moody Jr. M.D., which was published in the year 1977. Dr Moody categories his experiences into three: a) the experiences of persons who were resuscitated after having been thought, adjusted, or pronounced clinically dead by their doctors. b) The experiences of the persons who, in the course of accidents or severe injury or illness, came very close to physical death. c) The experience of the persons who, as they died, told them to other people who were present’[40].
Moody set down the outline of their reports in the following passage:
“A man is dying and as he reaches the point of the greatest physical distress, he hears himself pronounced dead by his doctor. He beings to hear the uncomfortable noise, a loud ringing or buzzing, and at the same time feels himself moving very rapidly through a long dark tunnel. After this, he suddenly finds himself outside of his own physical body, but still in the immediate physical environment, and he sees his own body from a distance, as though he is a specter, he watches the resuscitation attempt from this unusual vantage point and is in a state of emotional upheaval.
After a while, he collects himself and becomes more accustomed to his odd condition. He notices that he still has a body, but one of the very different nature and with very different powers from the physical body he has left behind. Soon other things begin to happen. Others come to meet him and to help him. He glimpses the spirit of a kind he has never encountered before- a being of light- appears before him. This being asked him a question, nonverbally, to make him evaluate his life and helps him along by showing him a panoramic, instantaneous play back of the major events of his life. At some point he finds himself approaching some sort of barriers or border, apparently representing the limit between earthly life and the next life. Yet, he finds that he must go back to the earth that the time for his death has not yet come. At this point he resist, for by now he is taken up with his experiences in the after life and does not to return. Instance feeling of joy, love, and peace overwhelms him. Despite his attitude, though, he some how reunites with his physical body and lives.”[41]
4) The fourth evidences from Mrs. Sthira Soudaminee who had a wonderful premonitory vision while she was betwixt asleep and awake before the death of Binodi Lal.
Mrs. Sthira soundaminee narrates the incident as follows: “About twenty years ago a younger brother of mine (Binodi Lal) had been suffering from consumption. We tried our best to save his life, but could not. We came to realize at last that his earthly career must soon come to an end, so we were in a state of constant dread on his account.
It was about 10 at night, three days before his death, and I was attending my sick brother. I went into the next room to see if I could freshen up my energies a bit. A little while, I felt myself extremely drowsy. Just than it seem to be that something was hovering over my head. When I heard this I woke up with a start. What I felt on that occasion can be well imagined. Suddenly however, I saw a light. I saw that it was emanating from the body of beautiful young man. Keenly, scrutinizing his face, I discovered that he was my nephew Saroj Kanti (son of Brother Basanta Kumar), who had died sometimes before. The whole family dearly loved him. My nephew looked towards me and said: “why are you so anxious? Uncle is now suffering, but he will be all right after three days.” Saying this figure vanished.
My brother died exactly three days after I had seen the vision. And then I came to realize that what the spirit of my nephew meant was that death would release my brother from the grip of the disease and end his sufferings after three days. But yet I could feel that men are living after death, live a happier life than they do here. This consoled me to a great extent. Let everyone cultivate spiritualism and he will be able to defy many of the misery of the world.”[42]
4) Mr. K.I. Isaac narrated one marvelous incident in his book glorious of life after death, which is as follows:
“ One my distant relatives, Mrs. Aleyamma, Mangalamadhathil house, near the Simhasana church, Puthenangady, Kottayam (Kerala), aged 57 years, had an attack of a rare disease by which her entire body was swollen with excruciating pain. She was writing with pain and wailing day and night. I used to visit her occasionally to console and pray for her relief. On one such occasion I saw her lying still. Only her mother aged 84 was there at that time. On seeing me she broke down and said ‘ my son she is dead –yet please close her eyelids my hand does not come for that.’ I was only 24 that time quit inexperienced in such thing stood hesitant.
Silently three minutes passed and then her eyelids closed automatically and in the next moment opened in a lively manner as if opening into consciousness. After sometime she cried and enquired ‘son why did they cast me back into this body? It would have been better if they had kept me there only’. She continued to wail. By this I understood that her soul has left the body and she had gone some distance in the path of death leaving the sickened body. I kept asking short questions and got very valuable information.
A) Were you not here? Where had you gone?
She said: “yes, I was not here, had been far away. I was very happy there. No pain or discomfort. I am very sorry they put me back here in this body.
B) How did you go there?
That was very simple. While I was lying here in a great pain I felt great weakness in my body and the pain gradually reducing. I felt my bone getting loose. Darkness entered my eyes and I was in complete darkness. Then I sensed that I was getting out of this body and going into thick darkness. I felt as if I was in the different body moving fast into space and as if I was flying or shooting into darkness. While proceeding like that I could see far away a small speck of light. I felt as if that light was drawing me towards it, as it was becoming brighter as I went shooting forward. When the light brighter around me, there was no trace of darkness. Then I realized that I died and was taken away from the world of suffering. I continued flying like cotton in the wind in absolute weightlessness. Looking around I could see angels. Then suddenly a loud voice sounded: ‘not yet time’. At the same moment they left me into this body.”[43]
6) “In October 2003 issue of the Reader’s Digest, Anita Bartholomew narrated an instance in which a Neurosurgeon Robert Spetzler and a British researcher Susan Blackmore PhD., spoke about the strange symptoms observed in a patient Pam Reynolds, 35 years, who had undergone a brain operation in 1991.Under deep anesthesia the entire blood in her body was drained off to a heart machine stopping her heart function and transferring breathing also to another machine. The brain surgery was performed for one hour after opening the skull with an electric saw. During that time life actually left her body and she was clinically dead. She met all the criteria for death.
Later when she was resuscitated, she spoke about her experience during the time when her body was in a condition. She said that she found herself traveling through a tunnel towards a light. At the end she saw her long dead grandmother. Then her uncle who led her back to her body instructed her to return. On returning she felt like plunging into the pool of ice water. On coming back to life she told the doctor that entire she had seen and experienced. The doctor is still bewildered at this strange phenomenon.
According to the indication of the different instrument, the doctor is sure that during the time of the operation there was no life in the body. He compared the body with computer with no power connection. Absolutely dead! In this state what had been her experience? She saw the doctors working on her and her body as if she saw it from a distance, lying still. When the eyes of the body are closed and brain dead, who is that animate personality viewing at a distance and remembering full details for recollection on resuscitation?
People may see uncommon sight in a coma or in hallucination. But for that the brain should function. In this case it is ruled out. This means life which requires all these vital organs functioning, has gone out of the body. That life is not in the hold of any doctor or psychiatrist. It has its own way of function and expression as revealed by this woman who had undergone such a very special brain surgery and revived.”[44]
Conclusion
The above incidents help us to have a strong belief in the life after death. These incidents are not myth. The reputed doctors collect these witnesses. These incidents are taken from the observation of the doctors as well as the words of person concerned that have actually gone through the experience of death and come back to earthly life. Life after death is not an issue of blind faith but it is real. Therefore we can sure that there is the possibility of soul going out of the body, the soul may come back to the body to continue life on this earth till God’s appointed time.
General conclusion
People believe that there must be some life after death. But exactly what sort of life? For whom is there something in man apart from body? A soul? What is the nature of soul? Whence did it come and where would it go and what it would become of it when man dies? These are fabulous questions. The history of philosophy attempts to answer these questions. They have answered in variety of ways. So this dissertation is study of how the great religions of the world and philosophers have handled these questions.
After analyzing of this subject the researcher likes to conclude that death is the mysteries things in the world. Once born, man should die. It is sure that all people will die in one day. It is a marvelous phenomenon that approaches us through its own mysterious way at an appointed time. Death is the gateway of eternal life. It is like lying down to sleep, sometimes due to various reasons we may not get sleep though we long for it. But at an unpredictable movement we fall asleep. Dying is also like that. Death is not the end of life but it is a preparation to the next life. Evolution is not ended with the evolving of human being but it continues in the realm of consciousness, which enables the man to realize he is only the embodiment of five elements but he has the divine with him. That invited him to the next world.
This dissertation will offer new points of view and useful information to anyone who comes forward with on open mind to enter into the secret boundaries of the spiritual realm. So who are interested in research and bold enough to enter without fear into the unexplored regions of the spiritual world, may come forward, and try to find out the details, not only for the information of those who desires to know them, but also for the people to believe.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BOOK
Basant kumar Lal. Contemporary Indian Philosophy. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Pvt. Ltd., 1999.346pp.
Benjamin Walker. An Encylopedic Survey of Hinduism. Delhi: Rupa & Co, 2005. 307pp.
Brain Daires. Philosophy of Religion .New York: Oxford University Press, 2000. 754pp.
Claude Summer. The Philosophy of Man. New Delhi: Central Printing Press, 1974.376pp.
Edward J. Gratsoh. Aquinas Summa. Bangalore: Theological Publication in India, 1990. 305pp.
Ghosh M.K. Life Beyond Death. New Delhi: Cosmo Publications , 1984.395pp.
Isaac K.I.Glorious. Life After Death. New Delhi: D.K.Print world (P) Ltd, 2007. 205pp.
Kalghatgi .G. Jainism. Madras Rathinam Press, 1978. 92 pp.
Kamath M.V. Philosophy of Life and Death. Mumbai:Jaico Publishing House, 2001.335p.
Louis P.Pajman. Introduction to Philosophy. U.S.AWads Worth and Thomson Learning, 2000.335pp.
Martin Forward. Religion a beginners Guide. England: One World Publications, 2006.190pp.
Michael Peterson (ed). Philosophy of Religion. New York: Oxford University Press, 2007.648pp.
1ohapartra A.R. Philosophy of Religion. New Delhi: Stealing Pubishers Pvt.Ltd.1990, 210pp.
Muhammad Sharif Chaudhry. Concept of God in the Quran. Delhi: Adam Publishers, 2006.175pp.
Paul J.Glenn – A Tour of the Summa of St.Thomas Aquinas. Bangalore: Theological Publication in India, 2001.466pp.
Rama Shankar Srivastava. Contemporary Indian Philosophy. New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers Pvt.Ltd., 1983.385pp.
Stephen Fuchs. Origin of Religion. Kerala: Pontifical Institute of Theology and Philosophy, 1975.152pp.
Thomas Velliamthadam. Greek wisdom. Kottaym: Catholic mission press, 1981.220pp.
Tiwari K.N. Comparative Religion. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass publisher’s pvt.Ltd. 2004.225pp.
Whitall N.Perry. A Treasurary of traditional wisdom. New Delhi: DP’S Impressive Impressions, 1971.1144pp.
INTERNET
http://www.yahoo.com/Free Wikipedia Encyclopedia/ “Life after death”.
http://www.google.com/ “Life after death”.
[1] Stephen Fuchs, “Origin of religion”, p-25.
[2] Stephen Fuchs, “Origin of Religion”, p-29.
[3] Martin Forward, “Religion a beginner’s guide”, p-122.
[4] Whitall.N.Perry, “A treasury of traditional wisdom”.p-225
[5] M.Talreja, “Philosophy of Vedas”. P-75
[6] K.N.Tiwari, “Comparative religion”. P-27
[7]K.N.Tiwari, “Comparative religion”. P-25
[8] Whitall N. Perry, “A treasury of traditional wisdom”. P-223
[9] M.Talreja, “Philosophy of Vedas”. P-76
[10] K.N. Tiwari, “comparative religion”. P-100
[11] G. Kalghatgi, “Jainism”. P-61
[12] Edward J. Gratsch, “Aquinas’ summa”.p-285.
[13] Dr. Muhammad sharif chaudhry, “ concept of God in the Quran” p-135
[14]Ibid, p-139
[15] Thomas vellilamthadam, “Greek wisdom”,p-89
[16] Thomas vellilamthadam, “Greek wisdom”,p-88
[17] Thomas Vellilam thadam, “ Greek wisdom”,p-89
[18] Paul J. Glenn, “ A tour of summa of St. Thomas Aquinas”, p-454
[19] Edward J. Gratsch, “Aquinas’ summa”,p-296
[20] Basant Kumar Lal, “ Contemporary Indian philosophy”,p-25
[21] ibid,p-26
[22] Basant Kumar Lal, “Contemporary Indian philosophy”,p-27
[23]Ibid, p-28.
[24] Ibid, P-29.
[25]Basant Kumar Lal, “Contemporary Indian philosophy”,p-107.
[26] Basant Kumar Lat,“Contemporary Indian Philosophy”, p-25.
[27] Rama Shanker Srivastava, “Contemporary Indian philosophy”, p-324.
[28] A.R. Mohapatra, “philosophy of religion”, p-40.
[29] A.R. Mohapatra, “philosophy of religion”, p-41.
[30] A.R. Mohapatra, “ philosophy of religion”, p-42.
[31] Brian Davies, “philosophy of religion”, p-698.
[32] Brian Davies, “philosophy of religion, p-699.
[33] Claude Sumner, “The philosophy of man”, p-71.
[34] Brian Davies, “ philosophy of religion”, p-721.
[35]Brian Davies, “ philosophy of religion, p-722.
[36] Ibid, p-723.
[37] Brian Davies, “philosophy of religion”, p-691.
[38] M.V. Kamath, “ philosophy of life and death”, p-25-27.
[39] M.V. Kamath, “ philosophy of life and death”, p-27-29.
[40] Ibid, p-29.
[41] Louis P. Pojman, “Introduction to philosophy”, p-462.
[42] M.K. Ghosh, “Life beyond death”, p-49.
[43] K.I. Isaac, “Glorious of life after death”, p-19-21.
No comments:
Post a Comment