Skip to main content

Proof of Heaven



Book Review

Author: Dr Eben Alexander
Published in India by Haechette in 2012
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. 

Comments

  1. 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:
    http://www.ted.com/talks/jill_bolte_taylor_s_powerful_stroke_of_insight.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 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)

      Beautiful message. Thanks for sharing.

      Delete
  2. "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.

    RE

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 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

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ayodhya: Kingdom of Sorrows

T he Sarayu carried more tears than water. Ayodhya was a sad kingdom. Dasaratha was a good king. He upheld dharma – justice and morality – as best as he could. The citizens were apparently happy. Then, one day, it all changed. One person is enough to change the destiny of a whole kingdom. Who was that one person? Some say it was Kaikeyi, one of the three official wives of Dasaratha. Some others say it was Manthara, Kaikeyi’s chief maid. Manthara was a hunchback. She was the caretaker of Kaikeyi right from the latter’s childhood; foster mother, so to say, because Kaikeyi had no mother. The absence of maternal influence can distort a girl child’s personality. With a foster mother like Manthara, the distortion can be really bad. Manthara was cunning, selfish, and morally ambiguous. A severe physical deformity can make one worse than all that. Manthara was as devious and manipulative as a woman could be in a men’s world. Add to that all the jealousy and ambition that insecure peo...

Bharata: The Ascetic King

Bharata is disillusioned yet again. His brother, Rama the ideal man, Maryada Purushottam , is making yet another grotesque demand. Sita Devi has to prove her purity now, years after the Agni Pariksha she arranged for herself long ago in Lanka itself. Now, when she has been living for years far away from Rama with her two sons Luva and Kusha in the paternal care of no less a saint than Valmiki himself! What has happened to Rama? Bharata sits on the bank of the Sarayu with tears welling up in his eyes. Give me an answer, Sarayu, he said. Sarayu accepted Bharata’s tears too. She was used to absorbing tears. How many times has Rama come and sat upon this very same bank and wept too? Life is sorrow, Sarayu muttered to Bharata. Even if you are royal descendants of divinity itself. Rama had brought the children Luva and Kusha to Ayodhya on the day of the Ashvamedha Yagna which he was conducting in order to reaffirm his sovereignty and legitimacy over his kingdom. He didn’t know they w...

The Little Girl

The Little Girl is a short story by Katherine Mansfield given in the class 9 English course of NCERT. Maggie gave an assignment to her students based on the story and one of her students, Athena Baby Sabu, presented a brilliant job. She converted the story into a delightful comic strip. Mansfield tells the story of Kezia who is the eponymous little girl. Kezia is scared of her father who wields a lot of control on the entire family. She is punished severely for an unwitting mistake which makes her even more scared of her father. Her grandmother is fond of her and is her emotional succour. The grandmother is away from home one day with Kezia's mother who is hospitalised. Kezia gets her usual nightmare and is terrified. There is no one at home to console her except her father from whom she does not expect any consolation. But the father rises to the occasion and lets the little girl sleep beside him that night. She rests her head on her father's chest and can feel his heart...

Liberated

Fiction - parable Vijay was familiar enough with soil and the stones it turns up to realise that he had struck something rare.   It was a tiny stone, a pitch black speck not larger than the tip of his little finger. It turned up from the intestine of the earth while Vijay was digging a pit for the biogas plant. Anand, the scientist from the village, got the stone analysed in his lab and assured, “It is a rare object.   A compound of carbonic acid and magnesium.” Anand and his fellow scientists believed that it must be a fragment of a meteoroid that hit the earth millions of years ago.   “Very rare indeed,” concluded the scientist. Now, it’s plain commonsense that something that’s very rare indeed must be very valuable too. All the more so if it came from the heavens. So Vijay got the village goldsmith to set it on a gold ring.   Vijay wore the ring proudly on his ring finger. Nobody, in the village, however bothered to pay any homage to Vijay’s...

Dharma and Destiny

  Illustration by Copilot Designer Unwavering adherence to dharma causes much suffering in the Ramayana . Dharma can mean duty, righteousness, and moral order. There are many characters in the Ramayana who stick to their dharma as best as they can and cause much pain to themselves as well as others. Dasharatha sees it as his duty as a ruler (raja-dharma) to uphold truth and justice and hence has to fulfil the promise he made to Kaikeyi and send Rama into exile in spite of the anguish it causes him and many others. Rama accepts the order following his dharma as an obedient son. Sita follows her dharma as a wife and enters the forest along with her husband. The brotherly dharma of Lakshmana makes him leave his own wife and escort Rama and Sita. It’s all not that simple, however. Which dharma makes Rama suspect Sita’s purity, later in Lanka? Which dharma makes him succumb to a societal expectation instead of upholding his personal integrity, still later in Ayodhya? “You were car...