Mortality is a topic that all adults entertain at some point. Often, in our younger years, we think about it in the most cursory of ways, but, as we age and the dark veil draws nearer, we come to realize that its inevitability isn't that far off. So, while the title of this entry is borrowed from the traditional wedding vows, the us and the parting I will discuss is life -- as we know it -- itself.
I realize that there are millions of people the world over who take some solace in the concept of heaven. They cast their earthly lot with the idea that there is something beautiful waiting for us on the other side. I don't share in this fantasy because there is nothing in this realm that even remotely suggests that it could be true.
I base my beliefs on both my own and other people's observations of the world around us. We understand that all forms are born, live and die. This is as true for human beings as it is for other biological forms as well as the things we humans create.
It doesn't matter if we reference a virus, blade of grass, giant sequoia, aardvark, or a washing machine! Each is born in its own way. Those that are able to skirt disaster, accident and disease, will live out their lives until their core components begin to breakdown. At some point, the chief mechanism that makes life and functionality possible will quit working and, in that moment, death occurs.
Once the mechanism has died, the next part of the process in the journey is decomposition. Some forms decompose rather quickly, while others break down into their constituent elements very, very slowly. It may take styrofoam or nuclear waste hundreds of thousands or millions of years to shed its form and substance, but, given time, everything ultimately breaks down.
I see no reason not to believe that the human species doesn't follow this same trajectory.
Aah, some will say, there is one variable you aren't taking into account: the soul or spirit of humans. My response is that, just like heaven or nirvana, a soul or spirit is nothing more than speculation. There is no proof that one exists. In fact, I would dare say the existence of this invisible thing is unprovable.
Even if it does exist, who is to say that every other form doesn't possess the same thing too? While I certainly can't prove this supposition, no one can disprove it either.
From my standpoint, the existence of a soul or spirit doesn't change what we can observe in the world around us anyway. Whether forms have spirits or not, we still can observe that being is born, lives, dies and decomposes. Who knows? If spirits are a reality, maybe they do the very same thing as well, but in a time sequence independent of being.
In the end, my guess is that anything you or I can conceptualize or imagine is light years away from what the process of death entails.
For me, it is just like Tao -- an arbitrary name we assign to the essence of life. In this same vein, our beliefs of death are just as arbitrary.
I realize that there are millions of people the world over who take some solace in the concept of heaven. They cast their earthly lot with the idea that there is something beautiful waiting for us on the other side. I don't share in this fantasy because there is nothing in this realm that even remotely suggests that it could be true.
I base my beliefs on both my own and other people's observations of the world around us. We understand that all forms are born, live and die. This is as true for human beings as it is for other biological forms as well as the things we humans create.
It doesn't matter if we reference a virus, blade of grass, giant sequoia, aardvark, or a washing machine! Each is born in its own way. Those that are able to skirt disaster, accident and disease, will live out their lives until their core components begin to breakdown. At some point, the chief mechanism that makes life and functionality possible will quit working and, in that moment, death occurs.
Once the mechanism has died, the next part of the process in the journey is decomposition. Some forms decompose rather quickly, while others break down into their constituent elements very, very slowly. It may take styrofoam or nuclear waste hundreds of thousands or millions of years to shed its form and substance, but, given time, everything ultimately breaks down.
I see no reason not to believe that the human species doesn't follow this same trajectory.
Aah, some will say, there is one variable you aren't taking into account: the soul or spirit of humans. My response is that, just like heaven or nirvana, a soul or spirit is nothing more than speculation. There is no proof that one exists. In fact, I would dare say the existence of this invisible thing is unprovable.
Even if it does exist, who is to say that every other form doesn't possess the same thing too? While I certainly can't prove this supposition, no one can disprove it either.
From my standpoint, the existence of a soul or spirit doesn't change what we can observe in the world around us anyway. Whether forms have spirits or not, we still can observe that being is born, lives, dies and decomposes. Who knows? If spirits are a reality, maybe they do the very same thing as well, but in a time sequence independent of being.
In the end, my guess is that anything you or I can conceptualize or imagine is light years away from what the process of death entails.
For me, it is just like Tao -- an arbitrary name we assign to the essence of life. In this same vein, our beliefs of death are just as arbitrary.
I like this and think this way myself.
ReplyDeleteI disagree. The soul is the mind, the ego, the personal life story of memory, thought, emotion. I don't think this survives death as a ghost, and agree with the Buddhist principle of anatta (that is, there is no eternal soul, which makes sense because the soul is the story of one's self that one imagines for himself and which changes as you live and do. Other people look at you differently than you look at yourself, and both perspectives are biased and limited).
ReplyDeleteThe spirit is the awareness, the consciousness, the perspective from which that soul is composed. Tao--in-me, Christ-in-me, whatever. This, one could say, returns to the infinite when we die, but of course, it's already one with the infinite. The point of the wisdom traditions is to one way or another get us to identify with this, rather than the soul/ego.
I really like how Alan Watts put this in his book The Supreme Identity, which is a bit of a hard read but worth it.
As for the bastardized notions of ghosts, and the confusion and melding of soul and spirit (which even in the bible are distinct), I guess I agree. Probably. I don't really know, actually. Better to remain neutral.
I am more or less with Brandon. There are serious issues of consciousness here. The mind-body problem is not so easily resolved.
ReplyDeleteBrandon & Baroness,
ReplyDeleteI don't understand what you are disagreeing with. I made no declarative statements in this post. I discussed possibilities and the directions I tend to lean, but I made no statements of fact.
Speaking only for myself, I think it's your agnosticism that I have a problem with -- for a spiritually inclined person, agnoisticim is just a convenient way to avoid wrestling with hard questions. I like the hard questions of soul, consciousness, spirit--searching for meaning, searching for the transcendent is part of what I am. (I am quite aware that the search may be all there is, but still...)
ReplyDeleteI have the feeling that I generated this post when I was poking you abut the Amazon metaphor. N'est pas?
RT,You never made a statement of fact? What does this mean that you said? "In fact", I would dare say the existence of this invisible thing is unprovable. What does "in fact". mean? Besides this statement of fact that you made, I think you are being a little over sensitive RT. Brandon and Baroness are only expressing their different views than yours. There is nothing wrong with starting off with the words, I disagree.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with Baroness last comment. She brings up a very good question to ask yourself.
Baroness,
ReplyDeleteAn agnostic person still wrestles with the same questions everybody else does. Me thinks that the big difference between the agnostic/atheist and the believer is that the former is more willing to accept the notion that the answers are unknowable.
Mark,
Touche!
Sometimes I wonder if being an agnostic is just a politically correct cover up for being an atheist. What do you think about that possibility RT? Is this possible?
ReplyDeleteWell, I consider myself to be an atheist. I'm not sure why the Baroness used the word, agnostic.
ReplyDeleteThe difference between the two that I favor is that an atheist sees no evidence of a god and so doesn't believe in one or more, while an agnostic is someone who is more open to the possibility, but remains rather ambivalent at the prospect.
I appreciate your honesty. I knew you were an atheist. It is all over your writings.
ReplyDeleteI would certainly agree with that observation!
ReplyDeleteRe: calling you (RT) agnostic. I was just giving you the benefit of the doubt, so to speak. You repeatedly throw up your hands and say, but we just can't/don't know. "Atheist" makes your position very clear. (I may be the true agnostic here.) These terms seem sort of archaic now, though, not quite right in dealing with Eastern thought.
ReplyDeleteStill I can't help but add, if you are a "believer" in something unknowable, undefinable, ineffable (accepting the Tao) I'm not sure athiest is completely fair...just because you don't believe in a personal God, or something other, you do seem to accept something beyond the material...or maybe not.