Life after death

[Patrick Walsh]

I am reading Nikolaos Vassiliades' "The Mystery of Death," and it has brought up a question that has been a recurring theme in my spiritual life.

If one examines carefully the process and meaning of one's own life, one can see that life is precious precisely because it is a finite. The fact that the from the moment we are born death follows us around like a shadow, and is ever present in our life. Modern life has worked extremely vigorously at concealing this shadow, but eventually, at some point in time, the shadow of death emerges again and again in our life. We are endowed with an awareness of death, and are able to contemplate the coming of death, unlike the animals, whose contemplations are confined solely to the needs of the moment.

The author writes, "From this point of view then, life without death is extremely impoverished." What has always puzzled me is that the Christian struggles for salvation, for life eternal in heaven. But "life without death is impoverished." Our need to love God, and our neighbor is driven by death. St. Isaac of Syria writes, "The fear of death is the beginning of faith."

Presuming for the purpose merely to understand, a person attains salvation and eternal life, and enters into the heavenly paradise. Then what is meaningful? In eternal life, time becomes irrelevant, and works unimaginable become child's play. A single man with eternal life can build a pyramid in 100,000 years--and this is only a moment of concentration to him.

In eternal life, what is relevant?

Patrick

[Father David Moser]

The presupposition here that is not supported either in Orthodoxy or logically is that "eternal life" is nothing more than "extended life" and that the same conditions and environment persist.

This life is but a shadow of "eternal life" and there is a qualitative and contextual difference that can't be fully comprehended. Physical death - that is the separation of soul and body - was never meant to be and only came about as the result of the fall in order to (among other things) teach us about "eternal death" which is separation from the life of the Holy Trinity. Too often we confuse "existence" with "life" in this world when in fact they are two different things. Life implies that we are connected to and draw from and are united with He Who is Life in His essence while eternal death is to be cut off from that and so thirsting for life, one is tormented by a thirst that cannot be quenched. Just because the soul (and after the general resurrection and the Great Judgement the whole being, soul and body) continue to exist does not mean that they are "living".

The only means of being connected to eternal life is in this part of our life in the world. If we carry that connection into the next life (the next world) then we continue to life and that connection is our source of life. OTOH, if we do not have that connection, then in the next world, we will desire life but will be unable to have it and so will remain in torment.

In the next life, it is not the building of pyramids or the accomplishment of "works unimaginable" that are important, but rather the acquisition of and union with Life Himself.

Fr David

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

In eternal life we experience life at its most distilled and purposeful whereas this present life is either distracted in vain pursuits or only a sign of that higher life.

That is why the remembrance or consideration of death is so important for us so that we focus on what is truly our life and understand that what we so often call 'life' is really dust & shadows. In hope we need to focus on what is beyond the present life where we shall meet Christ in a way we can scarcely imagine here.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Byron Jack Gaist]

Dear Patrick,

I used to own a copy of the book you are reading, but I think I gave it to a friend before I finished reading it! Maybe some unconscious fear of finality there...

You seem to be saying, if I understand you correctly, that the limit offered by the knowledge of our impending death is what makes life meaningful, and that therefore eternal life - where there is no death - may be without any meaning.

I wonder if that is so...Awareness that we will die is certainly fundamental to our psychology here, as any existentialist worth his salt will tell you; but surely the possibility of our final extinction, our mere ceasing to be, is the scandal - not the prospect of eternal life! Death as it is secretly imagined in the modern mind is quite terrifying, accompanied as it is by the utter indifference of a silent universe, whereas even the suggestion that there may be time outside "time" is enough to bring back hope into the soul. Death is unnatural. I can understand why some people may choose to "harbour no illusions" as they often claim, but surely only nihilism can ultimately be born of a philosophy which ends at death; even the nihilism of the "might-as-well-love-one-another-in-the-meantime" variety!!!

In Christ
Byron

[Patrick Walsh]

Byron

You seem to understand the question, but instead of answering the question, digress into the naturalness of death to life. God told Adam, "On that day, you shall surely die." So I understanding this somewhat as a Christian, do not dispute this.

But we are in a frame of reference where life has become meaningful because our physical demise is inevitable. From the moment we are born, we are trapped by death. Christ promised us freedom from death through participation in his ever-renewing sacrifice--the eucharist, yet the idea of this freedom puzzles me.

I ask this like the people in Plato's cave who suddenly come out into the light and see the world for the first time. But what is it in the next life that I will see that has meaning? Everything that has meaning in this world suddenly becomes irrelevant in the next life. So what is tangible in the next life?

Patrick

[Alec Lowly]

Patrick writes:


"I ask this like the people in Plato's cave who suddenly come out into the light and see the world for the first time. But what is it in the next life that I will see that has meaning? Everything that has meaning in this world suddenly becomes irrelevant in the next life. So what is tangible in the next life?"

I'm not sure that I agree with your premise, Patrick -- that it is death that makes life meaningful. To me, things like truth, goodness and beauty make life meaningful, whether death be close or far.

And the promise we have in Christ that death is the portal to a state of truth, goodness, and beauty beyond our conception, a state that will never end, a state that will continue eternally to grow and to deepen, without limit -- now this is really good news.

We Orthodox do not believe in a static hereafter, remember. We don't believe that we're going to sit on clouds playing harps with the angels forever and ever. Just as there is no limit to God, there is no limit to theosis -- by God's grace, theosis continues after death, forever.

You ask what will be "tangible" in the next life. "Tangible" (from Latin "tango," to touch) is a sensory concept that's irrelevant to the next world, where God will be all in all. What we experience here by touch, even at its most intense, will be a pale shadow in comparison to the brilliant being that we will experience there.

In XC,
Alec

[Byron Jack Gaist]

Dear Patrick,

You write:


But we are in a frame of reference where life has become meaningful because our physical demise is inevitable.

While I do not doubt for a moment that you understand God's warning to Adam as a Christian (please forgive me if I gave any other impression), nevertheless my own posting was an attempt to dispute precisely the above assumption being made. I do not personally believe that our physical demise is what gives meaning to life. Each must speak for himself on this issue, but what gives meaning to my own life are things such as the "intimations of immortality" we receive when we experience beauty in nature or art; also true friendship and matrimonial love; the innocence of children, and other such sloppy things that my sentimental old self warms to. To me such things may be signs of the next life, which is our true life. Death at the end of this life is therefore only a door into the next, that's my personal hope anyway. Of course what kind of eternal life one will have is another matter (yikes!)...

In Christ
Byron

[Paul Koufalas]

> I'm reading St Nicholas Cabasilas "The Life in Christ" at the moment, > and I'd like to briefly quote from it, as well as recommend it to you: > "But since it [Baptism] confers life, life on account of Him who has risen again, let us inquire what that life is. It is reasonable indeed that it should not be the same as that which we have lived in the past, but one far excelling the former, and with a nature of its own. Were it the former life which we have now, why did we have to die? Were it another having the same power, this would be no resurrection. Were it an angelic one, what have we in common with the angels?...it follows that this life is both a human life and a life superior to the former. It is by the Savior's life alone that all these things take place; it is a new life because it has nothing to do with the old life, it is inconceivably superior since it belongs to God. ...the birth in baptism is the life to come, and the provision of new members and faculties is the preparation for that manner of life. But it is impossible to be prepared for the future life unless we recieve the life of Christ here and now. ...The resurrection is the restoration of our human nature. ...These things we have the power to accept of to shun. Therefore those who are willing are able to enjoy them...For what has been said it is clear that those who have been born through Baptism live the life of Christ. But what is the life of Christ? I mean, what is that condition which those who have been benefited by Baptism and have been washed therein have in common with Christ in their life? This has not yet been made clear; indeed, the greater part of it surpasses human reason. It is the power of the world to come ...a preparation for another life...it is therefore impossible now fully to know the power of this life, even, I suppose, for the Saints themselves. They admit their ignorance of the greater part of it, and that they know it dimly in a mirror...it is impossible to express in speech even the things that they are able to know. While those who are in pure of heart have a perception and knowledge of them yet it is impossible to find words of speech suitable to the objects of knowledge and capable of expressing the blessed experience to those who know it not. The things which the apostle heard when he was caught up into paradise and the third heaven are "words that cannot be told, which man may not utter"...

[Patrick Walsh]

Father David
Blessings

Please forgive me for I probably sounded a bit dense, but I wrote my response to Byron's first post unaware of your excellent response to my question. Thank you for your response--this is the kind of discussion I was hoping for.

As for Byron's second response, and Alec's respone, I thank you for your thoughts. Please understand that I qualified the notion that "life without death is impoverished," just as Nikoloas Vassiliades did in his book. From the worldly perspective I gave, life is impoverished without death.

However, I think part of the struggle as Christians is to rid ourself of this perspective. As we grow in our faith, we see the folly in the wisdom of the world, as the Apostle tells us. What I am hoping for is to establish myself in the wisdom of the Apostle, and to develop my faith on a sure foundation. St. Isaac of Syria told us that "Fear of death is the beginning of faith." He is only speaking of the first phase, that of purification of the body.

Father David is correct to assert that all such things as pyramids, and great worldly achievements driven and measured by the span of a human life, are but dust. But if one were to remove death from life, from a perspective completely independent of Christian theology, such things would also be but dust. So there is nothing spiritual in realizing that pyramids are nothing more than the dust they are.

As for tangibility, I chose this word intentionally to incorporate the physicality of the next life. Christ ascended into heaven in bodily form. Elijah ascended into heaven in a physical chariot. Moses appeared on Mt. Tabor in physical form that was visible to the Apostles who accompoanied Christ to witness the Transfiguration. So I do not believe that our form in the next life will be that of the bodiless angels.

What I am hoping to learn is what can we do in this life which will carry forward into the next life. It is one thing to talk about innocence, goodness and beauty, but how do we apply these things from a practical point of view. How do we grow into the next life, so to speak. The church gives us a life of prayer, fasting and celebration. My personal opinion is that this discipline helps prepare us for the next life, but I do not understand this clearly. They seem to be a foretaste of the next life, except for fasting which I think will be discarded when we are in heaven. What other things foreshadow the next life in this life?

I am seeking to exit Plato's cave and, "Taste and see, for He is good." How do I establish myself in this perspective. How do I shed the foolishness of te world?

Patrick

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

Following from what others have said above what we hope for is an entry into that true life in Christ where sin and death hold no sway. Or at least we hope that when we die we may find a beginning of this- through the mercy of God and the prayers of the rest of the Church.

But I think that Patrick has raised a very good question that relates to our ascetic life. What is it in fact that we are detaching ourselves from? If this life is totally one of delusion, 'dust and shadows'- and the future hope is defined by the fact that we are entering a reality completely distinct from this- then how can we say that this existence is defined by anything other than death? As Patrick says, "I ask this like the people in Plato's cave who suddenly come out into the light and see the world for the first time. But what is it in the next life that I will see that has meaning? Everything that has meaning in this world suddenly becomes irrelevant in the next life. So what is tangible in the next life?"

Our Orthodox life must be ascetic to be real. But what we are renouncing is not this life as we experience it so much as it is death as it is manifested as sin and various delusions of mind and feeling. We are renouncing death to find life in Christ.

Also our ascetic life moves on a time-line towards Christ; we are called to grow in Christ so that as our life moves on we progressively enter Christ's realm of life.

So what defines our existence here is not death. Death is the enemy & so cosmic in its significance that it may seem as if this completely defines our present life. But we must never forget that death as the fruit of sin is the enemy that even now in anticipation is being defeated through Christ and our life In Him. Indeed that is a main purpose for Christ's Incarnation and His Church so that even now amidst sin & death the realm of life may be experienced by anticipation. It is this and only this which defines the meaning of our present life.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Byron Jack Gaist]

Dear Paul, Alec, all

That's a nice quote from Nicholas Cabasilas there, Paul. It seems to me that one of the strengths of our faith is it's honesty in demarcating what it does and doesn't claim to know.

In Christ
Byron

[Olympiada]

I am also going to comment on this but perhaps in a way not related to this thread
Patrick wrote


I ask this like the people in Plato's cave who suddenly come out into the light and see the world for the first time. But what is it in the next life that I will see that has meaning? Everything that has meaning in this world suddenly becomes irrelevant in the next life. So what is tangible in the next life?

I have seen The Cave of Plato mentioned in a commentary on The Four Quartets by T.S. Eliot. I wonder what relevance this philosophy has to us as Orthodox if any. Comments anyone?

In Christ
Olympiada

[Olympiada]

I would like to add to this thread T.S. Eliot's "A Lifetime's Death in Love" which was given to me as an understanding of marriage. This is a line from his Dry Salvages which is the third of the Four Quartets. I got into a disagreement with the person who gave this understanding to me and I *still* do not understand how marriage is 'a lifetime's death in love' after studying The Four Quartets for 7 months...It could be because I have not gotten to The Dry Salvages yet. I am still working through East Coker. At any rate if any is familiar with Dry Salvages and can explain that one to me I would appreciate it.

As you may know in Burnt Norton, Eliot gets into the temporal and the eternal, roses being the symbol for the meeting of the two, this is what I was taught. So this poem, The Four Quartets which won the Nobel Prize for Literature in the 40's is very relevant to this discussion on life after death!

In Christ
Olympiada

[Alec Lowly]

Dear Olympiada,

I know Four Quartets well. I would be happy to answer any questions you may have, if I'm able. Four Quartets is a very deep work. Forty years of study and I haven't hit bottom yet.

The quote you cite from Dry Salvages may be applied to marriage, if one wishes, but the primary reference in the poem itself is the apprehension of "the point of intersection of the timeless with time." Eliot is talking here about spiritual experience, primarily, and the "death in love" he refers to, refers to our relationship with God.

Four Quartets is probably the greatest Christian poem in English of the 20th century. Likewise wonderful, but much easier to understand, are Eliot's Choruses from "The Rock." Do read the choruses, sister. They're very inspiring!

In XC,
Alec, sinner

[Olympiada]

Dear Alec,

I did not think that line was about marriage and I challenged the man who thought it was and he said marriage was about becoming a saint. At any rate he cut me off...

I did not know that Four Quartets is the greatest Christian poem of the 20th century. It is!

In Christ
Olympiada

[Patrick Walsh]

I have not read (or previously had heard of) the Four Quartets of T.S.Eliot. In fact, I have read almost nothing at all of Eliot. I have, however, read all of Plato's works in English, and some in the original Greek.

In one of these works, I believe it is the Republic, Plato describes a cave in which people are watching shadows on the wall. They are able to discern the shadows from one another, but cannot see the light, or the object which creates the shadow. Since their entire experience is limited to this very shallow experience of reality, this is all they know.

Then one day, someone brings a few of them out of the cave. And they see reality in a much different way. They see the lights, the objects, and the shadows all together. And they see color instead of various shades of darkness and lightness.

Plato uses this as an analogy to illustrate the difference between a superficial understanding of various concepts such as justice, societal relationships, etc and a more profound experiential understanding. I believe this analogy is where the expression, "To see the light," comes from. "To see the light," implies that an obstacle to understanding a concept, no matter how simple, has been removed.

[M.C. Steenberg]

Patrick wrote:


Father David is correct to assert that all such things as pyramids, and great worldly achievements driven and measured by the span of a human life, are but dust. But if one were to remove death from life, from a perspective completely independent of Christian theology, such things would also be but dust. So there is nothing spiritual in realizing that pyramids are nothing more than the dust they are.

This does not necessarily follow. Keep in mind that there are, and always have been, a great many people in the world who believe in no after-life, who consider no 'larger vision' on experienced life, and who are also aware that time eventually returns to sand whatever has been fashioned out of it. From such a perspective, acknowledging or reminding of the status of such things as 'dust' is merely a reminder of the natural state of things. But this is not its purpose in Christian praxis. To understand the finitude of mortal life, and the transitory nature of things, is charged precisely so that one becomes more aware of, and participant in, the knowledge that the fullness of life transcends the transitory nature of this world. Understanding the nature of things as 'dust' is precisely a spiritual confession: it is a means of articulating the deeper spiritual realities that undergird the cosmos and our place within it.

To someone for whom the phrase has no spiritual connotation, the reminder might well mean that the fleeting nature of physical reality suggests it should be cherished and and possessed in immediate measure, since it eventually will pass away. To the Christian, it indicates above all that there is only value to the cosmos inasmuch as it is the divine reality made real in it that is lasting and of worth.

INXC, Matthew

[Olympiada]

I know that Eliot drew upon the cave to write this from Burnt Norton


The surface glittered out of heart of light,
And they were behind us, reflected in the pool.
Then a cloud passed, and the pool was empty.

And this is where it is referred : Donald J. Childs, "Risking Enchantment: The Middle Way between Mysticism and Pragmatism in Four Quartets." In Words in Time: New Essays on Eliot’s Four Quartets. Ed. Edward Lobb. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1993:

So "there is the argument by Bergsonian, Christian and Indian mystics alike that the moment of illumination reveals (as in Plato's metaphor of the cave) the distinction between reality and its mere shadow. The sunlight fills the empty pool; presence is overcome by absence; meaning seems to be revealed. Then there is Eliot's reservation about the Platonic language of light and shadow, for, given the values of light and shadow defined in the early essay, one finds a significant ambiguity in this mystical moment of illumination in 'Burnt Norton'. It is not clear what has been revealed, what truth it is that humankind cannot bear. Is the light (presumably the light of the Gospel of John that becomes the Word by the end of this poem) real, marking all else as merely shadow? Or is shadow real (the darkness that comes with the cloud), marking the momentary light as merely an illusion? It is not clear which of these phenomena the bird is calling 'reality'. The ambiguity is no accident; it comes from Eliot's disenchantment with the 'meretricious captivation' of this sort of 'promise of immortality' that he had encountered in Bergsonism. His fear was that the inner light was no more trustworthy than the inner voice, I which breathes the eternal message of vanity, fear, and lust.' As always, the test is pragmatic; these moments 'can be judged only by their fruits.'

My question is, what does this have to do with Orthodoxy? And for that matter what does Bergson have to do with Orthodoxy?

Olympiada

[Alec Lowly]

Olympiada writes:


"I did not think that line was about marriage and I challenged the man who thought it was and he said marriage was about becoming a saint. At any rate he cut me off... "

Well, the line can be applied to marriage by analogy. "A lifetime's death in love" can be seen as describing the total sacrifice of one's own will and desires to the well-being of one's spouse, which is the Christian ideal of the married state, and the means by which we can find sanctification through the married state.

St. Paul has much to say regarding this, the dying to the self. And he compares the relationship of husband and wife to that of Christ and His bride, the Church, for whom Christ laid down His life.

We need to remember that poetry, and especially very great poetry, has many levels of meaning.

In XC,
Alec

[Patrick Walsh]

Olympiades Greetings

I used Plato's Cave to illustrate my frustration at trying to understand what Orthodoxy is about. I converted about five years ago, and I am cradle Lutheran and an ex-Buddhist monk. I found Protestant beliefs to be superficial and totally lacking in amy spiritual depth. I found a great ocean, vaster than the mind can rationally grasp in Buddhism. But Buddhism is not a spiritual path to salvation, but rather to extinction. It even professes this in its' notion of nirvana. However, that is another subject entirely.

I am in the Orthodox Church now by the Grace of God. I am struggling to establish myself in Christian modes of thinking. Many times I find myself thinking in one way, and then learning that this is not the Orthodox way of thinking at all, but a worldly one. No great spiritually profound issues, but rather the simple, and the mundane day-to-day things of life give me the most problems.

Patrick

[Byron Jack Gaist]

Dear Patrick,

You wrote


I am struggling to establish myself in Christian modes of thinking. Many times I find myself thinking in one way, and then learning that this is not the Orthodox way of thinking at all, but a worldly one. No great spiritually profound issues, but rather the simple, and the mundane day-to-day things of life give me the most problems.

I don't know if it's any consolation to you, but this problem is shared by many who may be described as "cradle Orthodox". We're all trying to work out our salvation in fear and trembling, and our "phronema" is constantly being compromised by the unchristian world-views being touted by the mass media and our daily experiences in society. This I guess, for me links also the subject of obedience and responsibility, since to be truly obedient to God's Will is surely the supreme act of personal responsibility, and that implies struggle through prayerful discernment. Saints are pretty good at that I'm told, but more ordinary Joes like yours truly have to rely on the advice of the Church and their spiritual father to make it through the confusion!

In Christ
Byron

[Alec Lowly]

" ... to be truly obedient to God's Will is surely the supreme act of personal responsibility,"

That's wonderfully put, Byron, and articulates a finely nuanced understanding of the relationship between Christian obedience and personal responsibility.

In XC,
Alec