Some have compared the world to a book, but we can also compare the Book, the Torah, to the world.[i] Like the physical world, the "olam ha'Torah" consists of raw materials and technological built-up.[ii] Certainly the technology is implicit in the original raw materials[iii] and limited by it,[iv] but, nevertheless, our world is wholly unlike the world of previous generations.[v] Moshe saw the future vision,[vi] or saw the general laws of nature which would later evolve into the Torah of today.[vii] The Torah, however, is not open for manipulation; like the world,[viii] it is governed by rules of interpretation, a worldview which informs proper interpretation,[ix] and honesty.[x]
[i] See here.
[ii] R. Kook, Hakdada l’Ein Aya; R. Moshe Shmuel Glaser, Hakdama l’Dor Revi’i (a partial translation here).
[iii] This does not mean that an interpretation has be intended by the original statement, as long as the interpretation makes sense of the raw materials, the words, in a comprehensive and sound way. See here.
[iv] R. Cooperman, Peshuto shel Mikra.
[v] In fact, according to the oft-quoted interpretation of “Asher Bara Elokim La’asot,” the rectification of the world is our responsibility (also see Tanchuma, Tazria 5; the Sfas Emes, beginning of Tazria writes that Man’s role is to spiritually complete the world as well). This model also explain the Ohr ha’Chayim (Vayikra 13:37): "...and all of their derashot are only according to the [received] halakhot, and they enclothed them in the perfect written Torat Hashem. After them until this day it is the holy work (Avodat ha'Kodesh) of b'nei Torah."Connecting halakhot to the written Torah is “avodat ha’Kodesh” because it is building the Torah (even though according to the Ohr ha'Chayim only the derashot were innovated, not the halakhot).
[vi] Tosfot Yom Tov, Hakdama l’Mishna.
[vii] Shemot Rabbah 41:6 and Maharzav there.
[viii] Ramban, Vayikra 19:19; Zohar (vol. 3, p.86b)
[ix] Even the Dor Revi’i writes “The intent is that one who incessantly occupies himself with the Torah that is with us of old and "kills himself over it" can derive totally new insights which were never [apprehended] before.” The technology of the Torah cannot be forced upon her; it must be gently drawn out of her with her best interests in mind. Furthermore, this is one of the reasons why the Torah was partly Oral: This ensures a close-knit relationship with a teacher which in turn ensures a close-knit community; the Torah is personal, not just an intellectual topic and thus can only be kept and understood within a covenantal community and culture. As Rav Soloveitchik was quoted as saying, the fifth volume of the Shulchan Aruch is “pas nisht (not appropriate).” The Dor Revi”i explains that this is why the Talmud is binding and cannot be overturned today; “For, only when the holiness of the Jewish nation could develop securely in its own land was the Torah given over to be explained and interpreted according to the understanding of the contemporary judges whose judgments were to be followed even if they said "right is left" or "left is right," but not when the nation is scattered among the other nations and its sages oppressed by the yoke of physical and spiritual exile, when all the influences of the nations of the world are buffeting them and destroying the holy spirit within them.” Regarding interpreting the Torah from within its own “Jewish” framework, also see here.
[x] See here.
Monday, October 26, 2009
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Deeper is Higher - Part IV.5
Materialists attempt to reduce NDEs to pharmological, physiological-neurological or psychological mechanisms.
Pharmological explanations suggest that drugs administered during medical care, especially anesthetics, are responsible for a NDE. This explanation is problematic primarily because many NDE occur without medical care and drugs. Furthermore, many researchers have pointed out that those patients under pain killers or anesthetics have fewer and less detailed NDE. Lastly, accounts of hallucinations under the influence of drugs are different in key ways than a NDE (Life After Life, pg. 145).
Neurological explanations posit that NDEs are the outcome of brain activity during the death process. The Dying Brain Hypothesis is most famously attributed to Susan Blackmore. The feelings of bliss are triggered by the release of endorphines under stress, anoxia (lack of oxygen in the brain) and hypercarbia (high carbon dioxide) may be responsible for the tunnel vision and light, and temporal lobe stimulation may cause the life review and out-of-body distortions. However, Blackmore admits that these explanations do not account for the entire experience, and . A critique of her book can be found here. Among the problems with these type of explanations is that many cases of NDE occured when the patient was clinically dead under medical supervision. Some suggest that the brain wasn't totally dead and that there must be lingering "fragments of conscioussness" or "neural activity that is so minimal [that] it goes undetected." Yet if that were the case we would except a fragmentary or minimal experience instead of life-transforming, inspiring and lucid visions.
Psychological explanations are too many to count and generally not convincing in the slightest; NDEs are caused by expectations about death, or they are really a memory of one's birth, or an evolutionary advantage by feigning death, or memes etc. A more reasonable explanation is that a life-threatening emergency evokes a crises response wherein their REM state hijacks perception and the person will disassociate (The Spiritual Anatomy of Emotion, pg. 424). This explanation is lacking because not all NDEs occur under stress, or it happens so sudden that there is not enough time to have a crises response (for example, being blindsided by an oncoming car).
Now let us turn to some positive evidence for a spiritual explanation: NDEs demonstrate that consciousness can exist independent of the brain. Notice I do not suggest that NDEs conclusively demonstrate that there is life after death, because we do not know what lies beyond "the border" from which all returnees inevitably return. To begin I will quote some NDEs themselves.
"Pam Reynolds...had a giant basilar artery aneurysm...Neurosurgeon Robert Spetzler...was a specialist and pioneer in a rare, dangerous, but sometimes necessary technique called hypothermic cardiac arrest, or 'Operation Standstill.' He would take her body down to a temperature so low that she was essential dead, but then bring her back to a normal temperature before irreversible damage set in...As the surgery began, her heart was stopped, and her EEG brain waves flattened into total silence....and her temperature fell to 60 degrees Fahrenheit.
Pharmological explanations suggest that drugs administered during medical care, especially anesthetics, are responsible for a NDE. This explanation is problematic primarily because many NDE occur without medical care and drugs. Furthermore, many researchers have pointed out that those patients under pain killers or anesthetics have fewer and less detailed NDE. Lastly, accounts of hallucinations under the influence of drugs are different in key ways than a NDE (Life After Life, pg. 145).
Neurological explanations posit that NDEs are the outcome of brain activity during the death process. The Dying Brain Hypothesis is most famously attributed to Susan Blackmore. The feelings of bliss are triggered by the release of endorphines under stress, anoxia (lack of oxygen in the brain) and hypercarbia (high carbon dioxide) may be responsible for the tunnel vision and light, and temporal lobe stimulation may cause the life review and out-of-body distortions. However, Blackmore admits that these explanations do not account for the entire experience, and . A critique of her book can be found here. Among the problems with these type of explanations is that many cases of NDE occured when the patient was clinically dead under medical supervision. Some suggest that the brain wasn't totally dead and that there must be lingering "fragments of conscioussness" or "neural activity that is so minimal [that] it goes undetected." Yet if that were the case we would except a fragmentary or minimal experience instead of life-transforming, inspiring and lucid visions.
Psychological explanations are too many to count and generally not convincing in the slightest; NDEs are caused by expectations about death, or they are really a memory of one's birth, or an evolutionary advantage by feigning death, or memes etc. A more reasonable explanation is that a life-threatening emergency evokes a crises response wherein their REM state hijacks perception and the person will disassociate (The Spiritual Anatomy of Emotion, pg. 424). This explanation is lacking because not all NDEs occur under stress, or it happens so sudden that there is not enough time to have a crises response (for example, being blindsided by an oncoming car).
Now let us turn to some positive evidence for a spiritual explanation: NDEs demonstrate that consciousness can exist independent of the brain. Notice I do not suggest that NDEs conclusively demonstrate that there is life after death, because we do not know what lies beyond "the border" from which all returnees inevitably return. To begin I will quote some NDEs themselves.
"Pam Reynolds...had a giant basilar artery aneurysm...Neurosurgeon Robert Spetzler...was a specialist and pioneer in a rare, dangerous, but sometimes necessary technique called hypothermic cardiac arrest, or 'Operation Standstill.' He would take her body down to a temperature so low that she was essential dead, but then bring her back to a normal temperature before irreversible damage set in...As the surgery began, her heart was stopped, and her EEG brain waves flattened into total silence....and her temperature fell to 60 degrees Fahrenheit.
"When all of Reynolds' vital signs were stopped, the surgeon began to cut through her skull with a surgical saw. At that point, she reported that she felt herself "pop" outside her body and hover above the operating table. From her out-of-body position, she could see the doctos working on her lifeless body. She observed, 'I thought the way they had my head shaved was very peculiar. I expected them to take all of the hair, but they did not.' She described, with considerable accuracy for a person who knew nothing of surgical practice, the Midas Rex bone saw used to open skulls. Reynolds also heard and reported later what was happening during the operation and what the nurses in the operating room had said.
"At a certain point, she became conscious of floating out of the operating room and traveling down a tunnel with a light. Deceased relatives and friends were waiting at the end of this tunnel, including her long-dead grandmother. She entered the presence of a brilliant, wonderfully warm and loving Light and sensed that her soul was part of God and that everything in existence was created from the Light (the breathing of God). This extraordinary experience ended when Reynolds' deceased uncle led her back to her body (The Spiritual Brain, pg. 154; See here for more discussion of this case).
This is one such where there is "veridical perception" of verifiable objects. Kenneth Ring describes five such cases, including a case where a nurse at Hartford Hospital states that she worked with a patient who described a NDE in which she saw a red shoe on the roof of the hospital during her OBE, which a janitor then retrieved. Pim van Lommel reports a case in which a coronary-car nurse removed dentures froma cyanotic and comatose heart-attack victim and placed them in a drawer. The patient was revived by CPR, and a week later the nurse saw him again in the cardiac ward. "The moment he sees me he says: 'O, that nurse knows where my dentures are" (The Spiritual Brain, 155, 322). Skeptics of course discount such evidence as anecdotal and sometimes even poke holes in the stories. But I wonder at which point it becomes highly unlikely that all such stories are hoaxes, misinterpertations, false memories etc.
In the post of OBEs I already pointed out similar cases not involving NDEs which demonstrate veridical perception. There too I mentioned Ring's collected stories of blind people seeing during OBEs and NDEs.
"Third," I quote from The Spiritual Anatomy of Emotion, pg. 425, "is the frequency with which people who are near death report meeting deceased friends and relatives...Surely some of us would wish to converse with Elvis, or John F. Kennedy, or Marilyn Monroe, or Kurt Cobain." It seems that there is something more here than just a hallucination.
In conclusion, while I do not claim that all NDEs, or all aspects of NDEs, must occur in reality, I do believe that the evidence is on the side of the survival theory. It is possible that there is a continuum of experiences - some are fully internal and hallucinatory, while other are real external experiences that one's consciousness perceives when one makes the journey to the Light.
Friday, October 16, 2009
Why Learn Gemara - Part IV: The Expansion of the Self
In the previous post on this subject I suggested that learning is emphasized more than doing because it is possible to imagine more situations than are practically possible, and "infuse" them with the will of Hashem. Now I will elaborate on the role of the imagination in learning.
Menachem Ekstein in T’nai ha’Nefesh l’Hasagat ha’Chasidut (translated at Visions of a Compassionate World), explains that throughout life Man must his emotional capabilities in order to feel alive. If he follows this path he will eventually be able to experience the manifestation of Hashem. This is, he writes, the goal of the Torah – to expand our emotions so that we may sense the Presence of Hashem – but this aspect was neglected. Thus the Baal Shem Tov taught that one must do this through contemplative meditation. Thus, in his book, he advocates visualizing situations which will evoke all different types of emotion. However, it is implied from this words that one could use the Torah to expand his emotions through fully delving into the different situations, primarily through the thoughts and feelings of people involved in the situations. Similarly, he can experience different emotional situations through the imagery of the gemara.
In a broader sense, recognition of Hashem, the Infinite One, can only occur when one moves beyond their self-centered existence. Thus, when one learns halakha he is getting a taste of the broadness of life and moves beyond his own self-centered existence. Only through contemplating and visualizing all of existence, both its physical and moral manifestation, and perceiving the will and wisdom of Hashem will one come to this state.
Below I quote two very different thinkers on this idea: R. Shimon Shkop and l'havdil, Bertrand Russell. Even though they are not talking about gemara (especially Russell!) I think that their words are equally applicable to gemara.
R. Shimon Shkop, Sha'arei Yosher
The entire “I” of a coarse and lowly person is restricted only to his substance and
body. Above him is someone who feels that his “I” is a synthesis of body and soul. And
above him is someone who can include in his “I” all of his household and family. Someone who walks according to the way of the Torah, his “I” includes the whole Jewish people, since in truth every Jewish person is only like a limb of the body of the nation of Israel. And there are more levels in this of a person who is whole, who can connect his soul to feel that all of the world and worlds are his “I”, and he himself is only one small limb in all of creation. Then, his self-love helps him love all of the Jewish people and [even] all of creation.
In my opinion, this idea is hinted at in Hillel’s words, as he used to say, “If I am not
for me, who will be for me? And when I am for myself, what am I?”13 It is fitting for each
person to strive to be concerned for himself. But with this, he must also strive to
understand that “I for myself, what am I?” If he constricts his “I” to a narrow domain,
limited to what the eye can see [is him], then his “I” – what is it? Vanity and ignorable. But if his feelings are broader and include [all of] creation, that he is a great person and also like a small limb in this great body, then he is lofty and of great worth. In a great engine even the smallest screw is important if it even serves the smallest role in the engine. For the whole is made of parts, and no more than the sum of its parts.
Bertrand Russell's The Problems of Philosophy, The Value of Philosophy
The value of philosophy is, in fact, to be sought largely in its very uncertainty. The man who has no tincture of philosophy goes through life imprisoned in the prejudices derived from common sense, from the habitual beliefs of his age or his nation, and from convictions which have grown up in his mind without the co-operation or consent of his deliberate reason. To such a man the world tends to become definite, finite, obvious; common objects rouse no questions, and unfamiliar possibilities are contemptuously rejected. As soon as we begin to philosophize, on the contrary, we find, as we saw in our opening chapters, that even the most everyday things lead to problems to which only very incomplete answers can be given. Philosophy, though unable to tell us with certainty what is the true answer to the doubts which it raises, is able to suggest many possibilities which enlarge our thoughts and free them from the tyranny of custom. Thus, while diminishing our feeling of certainty as to what things are, it greatly increases our knowledge as to what they may be; it removes the somewhat arrogant dogmatism of those who have never travelled into the region of liberating doubt, and it keeps alive our sense of wonder by showing familiar things in an unfamiliar aspect.
Apart from its utility in showing unsuspected possibilities, philosophy has a value -- perhaps its chief value -- through the greatness of the objects which it contemplates, and the freedom from narrow and personal aims resulting from this contemplation. The life of the instinctive man is shut up within the circle of his private interests: family and friends may be included, but the outer world is not regarded except as it may help or hinder what comes within the circle of instinctive wishes...The private world of instinctive interests is a small one, set in the midst of a great and powerful world which must, sooner or later, lay our private world in ruins. Unless we can so enlarge our interests as to include the whole outer world, we remain like a garrison in a beleagured fortress, knowing that the enemy prevents escape and that ultimate surrender is inevitable.... In one way or another, if our life is to be great and free, we must escape this prison and this strife...[T]hrough the infinity of the universe the mind which contemplates it achieves some share in infinity.
Menachem Ekstein in T’nai ha’Nefesh l’Hasagat ha’Chasidut (translated at Visions of a Compassionate World), explains that throughout life Man must his emotional capabilities in order to feel alive. If he follows this path he will eventually be able to experience the manifestation of Hashem. This is, he writes, the goal of the Torah – to expand our emotions so that we may sense the Presence of Hashem – but this aspect was neglected. Thus the Baal Shem Tov taught that one must do this through contemplative meditation. Thus, in his book, he advocates visualizing situations which will evoke all different types of emotion. However, it is implied from this words that one could use the Torah to expand his emotions through fully delving into the different situations, primarily through the thoughts and feelings of people involved in the situations. Similarly, he can experience different emotional situations through the imagery of the gemara.
In a broader sense, recognition of Hashem, the Infinite One, can only occur when one moves beyond their self-centered existence. Thus, when one learns halakha he is getting a taste of the broadness of life and moves beyond his own self-centered existence. Only through contemplating and visualizing all of existence, both its physical and moral manifestation, and perceiving the will and wisdom of Hashem will one come to this state.
Below I quote two very different thinkers on this idea: R. Shimon Shkop and l'havdil, Bertrand Russell. Even though they are not talking about gemara (especially Russell!) I think that their words are equally applicable to gemara.
R. Shimon Shkop, Sha'arei Yosher
The entire “I” of a coarse and lowly person is restricted only to his substance and
body. Above him is someone who feels that his “I” is a synthesis of body and soul. And
above him is someone who can include in his “I” all of his household and family. Someone who walks according to the way of the Torah, his “I” includes the whole Jewish people, since in truth every Jewish person is only like a limb of the body of the nation of Israel. And there are more levels in this of a person who is whole, who can connect his soul to feel that all of the world and worlds are his “I”, and he himself is only one small limb in all of creation. Then, his self-love helps him love all of the Jewish people and [even] all of creation.
In my opinion, this idea is hinted at in Hillel’s words, as he used to say, “If I am not
for me, who will be for me? And when I am for myself, what am I?”13 It is fitting for each
person to strive to be concerned for himself. But with this, he must also strive to
understand that “I for myself, what am I?” If he constricts his “I” to a narrow domain,
limited to what the eye can see [is him], then his “I” – what is it? Vanity and ignorable. But if his feelings are broader and include [all of] creation, that he is a great person and also like a small limb in this great body, then he is lofty and of great worth. In a great engine even the smallest screw is important if it even serves the smallest role in the engine. For the whole is made of parts, and no more than the sum of its parts.
Bertrand Russell's The Problems of Philosophy, The Value of Philosophy
The value of philosophy is, in fact, to be sought largely in its very uncertainty. The man who has no tincture of philosophy goes through life imprisoned in the prejudices derived from common sense, from the habitual beliefs of his age or his nation, and from convictions which have grown up in his mind without the co-operation or consent of his deliberate reason. To such a man the world tends to become definite, finite, obvious; common objects rouse no questions, and unfamiliar possibilities are contemptuously rejected. As soon as we begin to philosophize, on the contrary, we find, as we saw in our opening chapters, that even the most everyday things lead to problems to which only very incomplete answers can be given. Philosophy, though unable to tell us with certainty what is the true answer to the doubts which it raises, is able to suggest many possibilities which enlarge our thoughts and free them from the tyranny of custom. Thus, while diminishing our feeling of certainty as to what things are, it greatly increases our knowledge as to what they may be; it removes the somewhat arrogant dogmatism of those who have never travelled into the region of liberating doubt, and it keeps alive our sense of wonder by showing familiar things in an unfamiliar aspect.
Apart from its utility in showing unsuspected possibilities, philosophy has a value -- perhaps its chief value -- through the greatness of the objects which it contemplates, and the freedom from narrow and personal aims resulting from this contemplation. The life of the instinctive man is shut up within the circle of his private interests: family and friends may be included, but the outer world is not regarded except as it may help or hinder what comes within the circle of instinctive wishes...The private world of instinctive interests is a small one, set in the midst of a great and powerful world which must, sooner or later, lay our private world in ruins. Unless we can so enlarge our interests as to include the whole outer world, we remain like a garrison in a beleagured fortress, knowing that the enemy prevents escape and that ultimate surrender is inevitable.... In one way or another, if our life is to be great and free, we must escape this prison and this strife...[T]hrough the infinity of the universe the mind which contemplates it achieves some share in infinity.
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Deeper is Higher - Part IV
Near-Death Experiences
A Near-Death Experience (NDE) is an episode where someone either came very close to death or were resuscitated after being clinically dead, and subsequently recounted experiences during the time they were "dead." The length of their time dead ranges from minutes to hours; the book 90 Minutes in Heaven recounts a lengthy NDE, and I once heard of a lady who woke up in the morgue and was able to describe in intricate detail her entire life from infancy (she then told the story to a rabbi who told it to me).
However, not all people who are pronounced clinically dead have this experience. A 1982 Gallup poll estimated that about 4 % of the population reported a NDE. Cardiologist Pim van Lommel found that 18 % of 344 heart-attack survivors who were clinically dead reported a NDE. Bruce Greyson reported that 10 % of Americans reported some recollection (The Spiritual Brain, pgs. 156-157).
The first part of a NDE usually consists of an Out-of-Body Experience (OBE) which we discussed here. However, a NDE goes beyond an OBE. Raymond Moody, in Life After Life, was the first to really make NDE part of mainstream consciousness and research. Although most people who have experienced a NDE have difficultly expressing it, finding it ineffable, Moody counts ten common, although not universal, elements to a NDE:
1) Hearing the news of one's death, (2) feelings of peace and quiet, (3) various unusual auditory sensations, (4) traveling through a dark tunnel, (5) out of body experience, (6) meeting other spirits (usually relatives or friends), (7) encountering a Being of light (sometimes described as God),(8) having a review of one's life,(9) reaching a border or limit, and (10) coming back to one's body.
A more current survey by van Lommel counts five general aspects: (1) OBE, (2) Holographic life review, (3) Encounter with deceased relatives or friends, (4) Return to the body, and (5) Disappearance of fear of death.
The effect of a NDE on one's life is nothing short of transformational. Besides losing the fear of death, they also find meaning in life (Life After Life, pgs. 82-87). They become more compassionate and loving (The Spiritual Brain, pg. 161) Even when NDE's follow an attempted suicide (which tend to not be so positive), the patient usually abandons thoughts of suicide (ibid, 159).
A Near-Death Experience (NDE) is an episode where someone either came very close to death or were resuscitated after being clinically dead, and subsequently recounted experiences during the time they were "dead." The length of their time dead ranges from minutes to hours; the book 90 Minutes in Heaven recounts a lengthy NDE, and I once heard of a lady who woke up in the morgue and was able to describe in intricate detail her entire life from infancy (she then told the story to a rabbi who told it to me).
However, not all people who are pronounced clinically dead have this experience. A 1982 Gallup poll estimated that about 4 % of the population reported a NDE. Cardiologist Pim van Lommel found that 18 % of 344 heart-attack survivors who were clinically dead reported a NDE. Bruce Greyson reported that 10 % of Americans reported some recollection (The Spiritual Brain, pgs. 156-157).
The first part of a NDE usually consists of an Out-of-Body Experience (OBE) which we discussed here. However, a NDE goes beyond an OBE. Raymond Moody, in Life After Life, was the first to really make NDE part of mainstream consciousness and research. Although most people who have experienced a NDE have difficultly expressing it, finding it ineffable, Moody counts ten common, although not universal, elements to a NDE:
1) Hearing the news of one's death, (2) feelings of peace and quiet, (3) various unusual auditory sensations, (4) traveling through a dark tunnel, (5) out of body experience, (6) meeting other spirits (usually relatives or friends), (7) encountering a Being of light (sometimes described as God),(8) having a review of one's life,(9) reaching a border or limit, and (10) coming back to one's body.
A more current survey by van Lommel counts five general aspects: (1) OBE, (2) Holographic life review, (3) Encounter with deceased relatives or friends, (4) Return to the body, and (5) Disappearance of fear of death.
The effect of a NDE on one's life is nothing short of transformational. Besides losing the fear of death, they also find meaning in life (Life After Life, pgs. 82-87). They become more compassionate and loving (The Spiritual Brain, pg. 161) Even when NDE's follow an attempted suicide (which tend to not be so positive), the patient usually abandons thoughts of suicide (ibid, 159).
Friday, October 9, 2009
Models of Torah II - The Torah as a Building
The foundation of upon which the Torah is built is middot tovot.[i] In other words, the Torah is built upon the person. The Written Torah is the outer structure of the building, while the rabbinic interpretations and injunctions provide for the functionality of building, the walls, ceiling and lighting, and the imperatives of “Kedoshim tiheyu” and “v'asita ha'yashar v'hatov b’eynei Hashem ” make for interior decorating, the Feng Shui.[ii]
As one learns and practices Torah the building grows. Indeed, we start with a soul but that is only the basement; through study and practice we can acquire higher souls,[i] build more rooms[ii].
The completion of the building is good but not enough according to some – we must build an elevator to bring us to the upper floors,[i] the infinite rooms and the marvelous view from above. This is called avodah – a spiritual toolset for self-observation and control.
And then we will have an infinite tower reaching to the Throne of Glory…
[i] R. Chaim Vital, Sha’arei Kedusha 1:2.
[ii] Ramban, Vayikra 19:2; Devarim 6:18
[iii] Arizal, Sha’ar ha’Gilgulim, hakdama 1, 18
[iv] Eliyahu Rabbah, Parsha 7
[v] Ramchal, Derech Hashem, 1:2:1
As one learns and practices Torah the building grows. Indeed, we start with a soul but that is only the basement; through study and practice we can acquire higher souls,[i] build more rooms[ii].
The completion of the building is good but not enough according to some – we must build an elevator to bring us to the upper floors,[i] the infinite rooms and the marvelous view from above. This is called avodah – a spiritual toolset for self-observation and control.
And then we will have an infinite tower reaching to the Throne of Glory…
[i] R. Chaim Vital, Sha’arei Kedusha 1:2.
[ii] Ramban, Vayikra 19:2; Devarim 6:18
[iii] Arizal, Sha’ar ha’Gilgulim, hakdama 1, 18
[iv] Eliyahu Rabbah, Parsha 7
[v] Ramchal, Derech Hashem, 1:2:1
Monday, October 5, 2009
Deeper is Higher - Part III
Charles T. Tart defines OBE's as having two crucial aspects: "(1) you find yourself experientially located at a place other than where you physical body is , and you may or may not see your actual physical body from an outside point of view; and (2) your consciousness feels clear during the experience...he generally feels that he's in his general state of consciousness, so that the concepts of space, time and location make sense to him (pgs. 190,196)." This is in contrast to a Near-Death Experience (NDE) which has an altered-state of consciousness component. However, OBEs are almost always occur during a NDE, and therefore there will be some overlap between these two experiences.
Unlike telepathy and psychokinesis, OBEs and NDEs are so common and striking that no one (that I know of) denies their existence; the only question is one of interpretation. The NY Times has reported that OBEs can be "induced by delivering mild electric current to specific spots in the brain," and therefore concludes that it the experience is the result of the "brain's attempt to make sense of conflicting information." You can see a video of this here. Susan Blackmore, a leading researcher and philosopher on OBEs and NDEs, basically concludes the same, but puts a little pseudo-Buddhist twist on her reductionist theory.
However, before we get to the evidence against the "brain-only hypothesis," I want to point out the logical flaw in this argument. It may be true that certain experiences can be induced under certain conditions but that does not mean that all such experiences, or something similar to it, must share the same explanation. In this case, OBEs occur in many different conditions- in extreme stress and in sleep, with volition or involuntarily, in meditation and hypnosis or during mania and drug use. Bruce Greyson, a foremost expert on NDEs, is quoted as saying "We cannot assume from the fact that electrical stimulation of the brain can induce OBE-like illusions that all OBEs are therefore illusions." Also see here. This is a common mistake that skeptics of the paranormal make; if they can come up with one explanation during one condition they generalize it to all such paranormal experiences. We will come back to this point in later posts.
There are two main pieces of evidence that demonstrate that an OBE, at least sometimes, is not a hallucination but an experience where the self leaves the body.
Unlike telepathy and psychokinesis, OBEs and NDEs are so common and striking that no one (that I know of) denies their existence; the only question is one of interpretation. The NY Times has reported that OBEs can be "induced by delivering mild electric current to specific spots in the brain," and therefore concludes that it the experience is the result of the "brain's attempt to make sense of conflicting information." You can see a video of this here. Susan Blackmore, a leading researcher and philosopher on OBEs and NDEs, basically concludes the same, but puts a little pseudo-Buddhist twist on her reductionist theory.
However, before we get to the evidence against the "brain-only hypothesis," I want to point out the logical flaw in this argument. It may be true that certain experiences can be induced under certain conditions but that does not mean that all such experiences, or something similar to it, must share the same explanation. In this case, OBEs occur in many different conditions- in extreme stress and in sleep, with volition or involuntarily, in meditation and hypnosis or during mania and drug use. Bruce Greyson, a foremost expert on NDEs, is quoted as saying "We cannot assume from the fact that electrical stimulation of the brain can induce OBE-like illusions that all OBEs are therefore illusions." Also see here. This is a common mistake that skeptics of the paranormal make; if they can come up with one explanation during one condition they generalize it to all such paranormal experiences. We will come back to this point in later posts.
There are two main pieces of evidence that demonstrate that an OBE, at least sometimes, is not a hallucination but an experience where the self leaves the body.
"As her physician was closing the incision, Sarah's heart stopped beating...But the emergency was over in a minute for it took no more time than that for the anesthesiologist to defibrillate her...She had some thing else to show that amazed her and the rest of the surgery team as well - a clear, detailed memory of the frantic conversation of the surgeons and nurses during the cardiac arrest; the OR layout; the scribbles on the surgery schedule board in the hall outside; the covering of the sheets covering the operating table; the hairstyle of the head scrub nurse; the names of the surgeons in the doctors' lounge down the corridor who were waiting for her case to be concluded; and even the trivial fact that her anesthesiologist that day was wearing unmatched socks. All this she knew even though she had been fully anesthetized and unconscious during the surgery and the cardiac arrest. But what made Sarah's vision even more momentous was the fact that, since birth, she had been blind (Larry Dossey, Recovering the Soul, pg. 17-18)."
Kenneth Ring in Mindsight have reported dozens of cases where the blind have some sort of sight during OBEs or NDEs. Regardless of whether these visions were independently verified by others, it is still quite unexpected for a blind person to see during an OBE if it were just a hallucination. From my limited research it seems that blind people on psychedelic drugs do not experience visual hallucinations.
The second type of evidence is when an OBEr sees something that at their body's position would be impossible to see. I first heard of this from a friend about a friend who trained himself to have an OBE before falling asleep. To check whether he was really leaving his body or it was just a hallucination, he placed a playing card on the other side of the room without looking at it. During the OBE he would travel to the other side of the room and look at the card. When he woke up he would check whether he could "guess" the right card. He could. These homemade experiments went on until a well-known Kabbalist (you could guess who) told him to stop.
Charles Tart had the same idea and here is an account of one such experiment with Miss Z: "Each labatory night, after the subject was lying in bed, the physiological recordings were running satisfactorily, and she was ready to got sleep, I went into my office down the hall, opened up a table of random numbers at random...I the slipped it into an opaque folder, entered the subjects room, and slipped the piece of paper onto the shelf without at anytime exposing it to the subject. This now provided a target which would be clearly visible to anyone whose eyes were located approximately six and a half feet off the floor or higher, but was otherwise not visible to the subject. The subject was instructed to sleep well, to try and have an OBE...She was also told that if she floated high enough read the five-digit number, she should memorize it and wakw up immeidately afterwards to tell me what it was...The number 25132 was indeed the correct target number near the cieling above her head...the odds of guessing a five-digit number by chance alone on one try are a hundred thousand to one (The End of Materialism, pgs. 202-203)."
It seems that the only other plausible explanation of this story is telepathy so take your pick...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
