Book Review
Author: Dr
Eben Alexander
Pages: 194,
Price: Rs 350
The
subtitle of the book is A Neurosurgeon’s
Journey into the Afterlife. Dr
Alexander, the author, is a neurosurgeon by profession. Bacterial meningitis sent him into a coma for
a week from Nov 10, 2008. The bacteria
had made the entire neocortex of his brain dysfunctional. But Dr Alexander claims that his
consciousness (or soul, if you prefer) travelled to a realm which he thinks is
the ultimate reality, the divine milieu.
Dr
Alexander’s experience reveals a reality or phenomenon which many mystics
experienced in the past, irrespective of their religion. It is a reality in which everything is
interrelated and love is the binding link. No one / nothing is a separate
entity with a distinct ego. You have
your identity, but you are at the same time deeply aware of your essential
relationship with all the reality around.
You can feel the love and the relationship. You can understand whatever is around you
without any communication.
Perfect
understanding and love. That’s the
heaven to which Dr Alexander’s consciousness rose while his comatose body lay
in the ICU of Lynchburg General Hospital.
Dr
Alexander claims that he met God though he does not use that word. He uses the word ‘Core.’ It is an experience rather than a personal
entity. But there was an angelic
individual, a beautiful girl, who escorted him to that Core.
Without the
use of or need for any medium of communication, Dr Alexander learnt that it is
a world in which everyone is loved and cherished; no one has anything to fear;
and that there is nothing you can do wrong.
There is only love and understanding in that world; there is no
evil. He also learns that evil is
necessary on the earth “because without it free will was impossible, and
without free will there could be no growth – no forward movement, no chance for
us to become what God longed for us to be” (48).
While I can
accept Dr Alexander’s vision of heaven as a place of pure love and unmediated
understanding, I find it impossible to accept his logic (or the revelation he
received in heaven) about the necessary link between evil and free will. Does this imply that there is no free will in
heaven? Moreover, why should free will
necessarily imply evil?
Dr Alexander
analyses his experience using the various hypotheses and models available to
medical science only to find that there is no scientific explanation for his
experience. But a mere absence of a
scientific explanation does not validate a supernatural explanation. The doctor, however, argues that his
experience was indeed real and divine, and scientific too. Scientific, because Heisenberg and many other
scientists showed that our consciousness is an integral part of the reality
around us, and Dr Alexander’s experience just validated that theory. “What I discovered out beyond is the
indescribable immensity and complexity of the universe, and that consciousness is the basis of all that
exists” (155, emphasis in the original).
I’m not
questioning the meaning or relevance of Dr Alexander’s vision. I can accept the mystical perception into the
nature of the ultimate reality. If all
the people on the earth could actually raise their consciousness to that level
of perception, the earth would be a paradise and we wouldn’t need to crave for
a heaven elsewhere. Dr Alexander’s
vision is valid. The method by which he
arrived at it is not what really matters.
Here I’d go with Bernard Shaw who said in his preface to Saint Joan, “The test of sanity is not
the normality of the method but the reasonableness of the discovery.” Shaw went on to say that if Isaac Newton had
seen the ghost of Pythagoras walk into the orchard and explain why the apples
were falling, the theory of gravitation would not be invalidated. Similarly, Dr Alexander’s vision of the
deeper meaning of reality and the need for making our consciousness more
profound in order to understand it is valid.
It is his claims
about God and spirits that I find it difficult to accept. God is not necessary to explain the doctor’s
experience, according to me. The doc
himself says, “The brain is the most sophisticated – and temperamental – organ
we possess. Tinker around with it,
lessen the degree of oxygen it gets by a few torr (a unit of pressure), and the
owner of that brain is going to experience an alteration in their reality. Or more precisely, their personal experience
of reality” (138). With a brain whose
entire neocortex had become dysfunctional, Dr Alexander too experienced the
reality in a different way. Maybe, like
the mystics did.
I enjoyed
reading the book in spite of the images of the omniscient, omnipotent,
all-loving Christian God that dominates the heaven of the doctor although the
sound he hears in association with that God is Om! I enjoyed it because I have always felt
somewhere deep within me that the mystical visions about the essential
interrelation among beings are true. I
too believe that the basic evil is in separating ourselves into our little egos
instead of trying to understand the relatedness.
I don’t
accept Dr Alexander’s God, the angels and spirits. But I accept the profundity, the mysticism of
his vision.
I also
found the doctor’s biography interesting.
He was born to a 16-year old girl who left him in a children’s
home. He was adopted (“chosen”) and very
much loved by the family in which grew up with step-siblings. His quest for his biological parents and
biological siblings, the acute pain he experienced when his mother refused to
contact him, the resulting alcoholism, and the final triumph – I enjoyed
reading every bit of it. Dr Alexander
comes across as a very loving and equally sensitive person. It is quite understandable that he had a
mystical vision.
The fact
that he was speaking about flying and skydiving when he recovered from his coma
also may indicate that his consciousness was indeed flying somewhere in the
clouds while his body lay helplessly inert.
Flying and skydiving were the hobbies of his youth.
The book
keeps a suspense too about the angelic girl who escorted him in his
heaven. I shall not mention the suspense
here. May you enjoy reading it if you
wish to. If you are a staunch
unbeliever, the doctor says himself, you won’t enjoy the book, perhaps.
Tom, it reminds me of a TED video where Jill Bolte tells about her experience of having an ictus. YOu can see that video at:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.ted.com/talks/jill_bolte_taylor_s_powerful_stroke_of_insight.html
I am the life-force power of the universe. I am the life-force power of the 50 trillion beautiful molecular geniuses that make up my form, at one with all that is.” (Jill Bolte Taylor)
DeleteBeautiful message. Thanks for sharing.
"Moreover, why should free will necessarily imply evil?" - what would it mean to say that one can choose between two good things? If you have to choose it has to be between two things that can be differentiated; and you attach values to the two things, say, good and evil. This is why free will - to choose - implies good and evil.
ReplyDeleteRE
Raghuram, one thing which i never understood about this free will as discussed by western philosophers is that they always made it a choice between good and evil. You are asking a typical Intelligent question which I too have been asking from the time I learnt to think independently. Why not make a choice between two good things? Why didn't the stupid God make that kind of a choice when he created man/woman?
Delete