Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Interesting but just a bit of hype to sell a book.
The fact that he could title his book "Proof of Heaven" shows he either doesn't understand the concept of scientific proof or is ignoring it. He had a brain injury, and later remembers an experience. Just like all the other people who have a "near-death" experience. That is not proof of anything beyond people with trauma to their brains have strange memories.
There are many educated people who are firm believers in a Christian heaven and afterlife and that includes surgeons and scientists. Educated people are just as prone to forming beliefs without facts.
That was awesome! I swear I know that doctor from somewhere. Has he been a talking head on something? He looks really familiar. I believe in near death experiences myself, so I think it's awesome that he had one and is sharing it. Cool stuff.
A successful neurosurgeon, who has taught at Harvard Medical School and other universities, spent his life dismissing claims of heavenly out-of-body experiences and refuting such talk with scientific logic, until he himself had a near-death experience.
Great news! Hopefully the western materialists, like Dan Weiss, will begin to have doubts about their one-life & one-death theory. Incidentally, the phenomenon of shared death experience (SDE) is starting to come to the public's attention thanks to Dr. Raymond Moody. A person who has had an SDE is a person who when sitting next to a dying person, usually a loved one, shares their spirit's death experience directly (after life review, the light, leaving the body, etc.).
Bottom line: It is not irrational to believe in NDEs, OBEs, SDEs, and that there is life after death and that we are greater than the sum of our biological parts. I will even say that QM predicts non-physical realities and by implication, non-physical states of being and beings (sattvas).
I saw a thing about NDE's and there was this chick who had an SDE, but I'm not sure it was the same thing. She and a friend were in a car crash, and the friend died and she was dead for a while, but she and her friend were both in the heaven place for a while until she came back. She said they were together.
You know folks, I'm rather disappointed in some of the comments here. Is this the open-mindedness that Buddhists claim to show? That quest for information we pretend to have? Or is this the clinging we are warned to worry about -- the author doesn't agree with what I believe, so I'm not going to at least consider seriously what he's saying.
I have no idea whether what this doctor (who appears to be a rather impressive individual, based on his actual credentials...and is probably relatively rich to begin with) is espousing is correct or incorrect. And, like (I assume) most of you, I haven't read his book...just a short magazine article or watched a video that lasted a couple of minutes.
Oh, and by the way, is the title of the book what the author wanted, or the publishing company insisted on?
If this same guy wrote a book about rebirth that verified the Buddhist viewpoint, many people on this forum would be standing and applauding.
I'm glad we don't judge people here on this forum!
If this same guy wrote a book about rebirth that verified the Buddhist viewpoint, many people on this forum would be standing and applauding.
There is such a work. The title of the book is Delog: Journey to Relams Beyond Death by Delog Dawa Drolma.
Dawa Drolma, one of the great Vajrayana Buddhist lamas of the century and mother of Chagdud Tulku Rinpoche, lived in Kham in Eastern Tibet. At the age of 16 she fell ill and died, but returned to her body after five days and lived into her 30's. For the benefit of others she recorded every detail of her experiences in the bardo and pure realms. Her daughter, T'hrinlay Wangmo, preserved the diary until 1987, when Chagdud Rinpoche brought it out of Chinese-occupied Tibet to be published in the West. ~ from Amazon
I know Tibetans applaud it (I spend some time with Chagdud). I am not sure about secular Buddhists like Stephen Batchelor. Some secular Buddhists might be of a mind to toss it into the dust bin with the rest of the Buddha's discourses since they don't chime with a materialist's view of Buddhism.
You know folks, I'm rather disappointed in some of the comments here. Is this the open-mindedness that Buddhists claim to show? That quest for information we pretend to have? Or is this the clinging we are warned to worry about -- the author doesn't agree with what I believe, so I'm not going to at least consider seriously what he's saying.
I'm glad we don't judge people here on this forum!
I read his account with interest - I have read many such compelling accounts - not sure what more I can do.
I also notice that despite his profound experience, he's trying to make money from it - especially so as he is using his credentials as a doctor to link with 'proof' in the title of his book.
I think it's easy to snipe but someone's got to put it out there in the firing line.
I mean, don't follow the guy off a cliff because he says he sat on a cloud, but at the same time, your mind doesn't make life much fun when it instantly goes 'NDE - book - money - cynical ploy'.
And let's keep in mind before we criticize his book too much...it hasn't even been published yet.
0
DaftChrisSpiritually conflicted. Not of this world.Veteran
I read the articles and found them quite interesting. I'm still fairly skeptical of NDEs, but I'm certainly open to the idea of them.
However, the one thing I'm really disappointed in were the comments on the articles themselves. After reading them, the only conclusion I come to was that, since he holds a belief they don't have, then they automatically dismiss it. Without giving it any consideration that it could be true.
We as humans should have that curiosity, that thirst, of the unknown. Once we ignore the accounts (despite how, admittingly, subjective and anecdotal they are) and place ourselves in our own box, we become closed to the infinite possibilities that could be out there.
What I thought was interesting about the experience was the very Buddhist flavour of a lot of it:
Seeing and hearing were not separate in this place where I now was. I could hear the visual beauty of the silvery bodies of those scintillating beings above, and I could see the surging, joyful perfection of what they sang. It seemed that you could not look at or listen to anything in this world without becoming a part of it—without joining with it in some mysterious way. Again, from my present perspective, I would suggest that you couldn’t look at anything in that world at all, for the word “at” itself implies a separation that did not exist there. Everything was distinct, yet everything was also a part of everything else, like the rich and intermingled designs on a Persian carpet ... or a butterfly’s wing.
I would categorise it as one of the high jhanas, but not unbinding. He's still in Omelas, with the relative perception of being 'high up'. His joy still seems for him to depend on there being earth and hell for constrast. He's still a self in a place that is not other places, a state that is not other states.
Much Buddhist thought is very negative, apophatic teaching. I think it's useful from time to time to get a little glimpse of just how good the fruit of the practice is.
There's a great story about a zen monk who comes to his master with a story just like the one above, about a great trip to heaven. The master doesn't even look up and says, 'keep practising'.
The next day the master and his disciple are eating strawberries, and the monk suddenly exclaims 'this is the best strawberry I've ever tasted'.
If this same guy wrote a book about rebirth that verified the Buddhist viewpoint, many people on this forum would be standing and applauding.
I attack both chrisitans and Buddhists. I am an equal opportunity attacker. Seriously, one has to take these bizarre claims with a grain of salt (or in this case sugar, if you know what I mean, lol). Religious conditioning is not easy to overcome, and the mind can imagine a lot. Plus there is wishful thinking ... Who doesn't want heaven, eh?
I attack both chrisitans and Buddhists. I am an equal opportunity attacker. Seriously, one has to take these bizarre claims with a grain of salt (or in this case sugar, if you know what I mean, lol). Religious conditioning is not easy to overcome, and the mind can imagine a lot. Plus there is wishful thinking ... Who doesn't want heaven, eh?
Perhaps you might approach things a little differently than as a "attacker" (your word).
You haven't read the book. You read an article by a magazine writer who probably didn't read the book yet, either. So you can't know that what he writes is "bizarre".
There's a tremendous difference between analyzing and attacking.
I attack both chrisitans and Buddhists. I am an equal opportunity attacker. Seriously, one has to take these bizarre claims with a grain of salt (or in this case sugar, if you know what I mean, lol). Religious conditioning is not easy to overcome, and the mind can imagine a lot. Plus there is wishful thinking ... Who doesn't want heaven, eh?
Perhaps you might approach things a little differently than as a "attacker" (your word).
You haven't read the book. You read an article by a magazine writer who probably didn't read the book yet, either. So you can't know that what he writes is "bizarre".
There's a tremendous difference between analyzing and attacking.
No, the author has described his experiences in the article. Besides, this isn't about the book content per se. It is about money making tactics. Btw, have you changed your mind about rebirth?
..Besides, this isn't about the book content per se. It is about money making tactics. Btw, have you changed your mind about rebirth?
So here are the two possibilities I see: you are permanently unemployed. Or, you have a job and you make money (or your spouse does). Is there something wrong with making money?
Have I changed my mind about rebirth? Yes. I used to not believe in it. Now I am open-minded about it. I accept it as one of several possibilities upon death.
Looking at that painting, I'd go with schizophrenia rather than synesthesia,lol.
In a way; he is expressing a way of experiencing that the Buddha's system classified as 'beyond range'. There is a documented correlation between art and schizophrenia.
In describing 'the all', the Buddha was describing samsara, not reality. But definitions here are mute.
Honestly. I don't care. Doesn't affect me, shouldn't affect how I live my life, and one man's 'proof' (outside a laboratory) is another man's 'fantasy'. If rebirth is real, then it's real. If it's not, then it's not. If Heaven exists, then it exists. If not, then so be it. Why would it - or should it - matter?
Honestly. I don't care. Doesn't affect me, shouldn't affect how I live my life, and one man's 'proof' (outside a laboratory) is another man's 'fantasy'. If rebirth is real, then it's real. If it's not, then it's not. If Heaven exists, then it exists. If not, then so be it. Why would it - or should it - matter?
This is basically my thoughts on rebirth and all that jazz, at the start of my Buddhist practice I was a person who believed in rebirth enough to get into arguments about it, now like I have said before focus on the now and live the most virtuous and profound life that you can, if it is real then it will be a bonus....
In this context, it is not so unreasonable to suppose that perhaps a first hand experience of 'heaven' or 'continuity' would serve as a distraction from the distractions...
Millions of people have had paranormal experiences, but according to our skeptics everyone of them is hallucinating—this includes Dr. Eben Alexander!
Behind the skeptic's thinking are assumptions about the way science works that a not true or accurate; which come from Logical Positivism. For example, science is value free. All truth is objective (whoops, good bye Mr. Buddha), reality is what can be tested and measured, and there is only one method for science by which all claims are to be verified. This is a bunch of rubbish. It was shot down by Popper, Hilary Putnam and others. In truth, science is really open-ended. There are any number of reality grids by which we can do science.
Two scientists can investigate the same problem and go down completely different roads due to different backgrounds and training and personalities. For every success there are 100 dead ends and it is the pursuit of understanding that keeps scientists going.
Scientific Method: 1 clearly describe the problem 2 make observations and tests 3 form a guess or hypothesis which describes the observations 4 more tests....
So just relax and let someone have a different hypothesis from your own!
Damn, Songhill. I find myself actually agreeing with you on something!
Some of the great thinkers in the geological and geographical sciences were involved in what might be referred to as "descriptive geography and geology". Later, the statistician geologists and geographers came along...and pretty much confirmed what the descriptive geologists and geographers had long ago concluded. In fact, I would class Darwin as a descriptive scientist.
Science has helped us to extend life and save lives, I respect it for that. But one can study and study and delve themselves into such academic paths til the day they day and never catch a glimpse of the truth.
As Buddhists, we must question ourselves as to why we are eager to accept any of this. Is it craving for something eternal? Mindfulness may be of use here.
As Buddhists, we must question ourselves as to why we are eager to accept any of this. Is it craving for something eternal? Mindfulness may be of use here.
Yes if you are eager to accept a concept such as this I think it would be a good idea to have a look at why. I personally don't care
As Buddhists, we must question ourselves as to why we are eager to accept any of this. Is it craving for something eternal? Mindfulness may be of use here.
Craving for immortality is an expression of the distance between delusion and reality.
You cannot surrender such a craving, because it isn't a craving; it's delusion's unmaking. You can only surrender to the deathless.
Science has helped us to extend life and save lives, I respect it for that. But one can study and study and delve themselves into such academic paths til the day they day and never catch a glimpse of the truth.
I don't know if science had anything to do with it, but I thank whoever invented the washing machine, fly screen (live on a ranch and you will know what I mean) and the safety razor, to name just a few great inventions.
Science has helped us to extend life and save lives, I respect it for that. But one can study and study and delve themselves into such academic paths til the day they day and never catch a glimpse of the truth.
I don't know if science had anything to do with it, but I thank whoever invented the washing machine, fly screen (live on a ranch and you will know what I mean) and the safety razor, to name just a few great inventions.
Which all help to extend life and make life a better place to live. I respect that kind of science yes.
If the Doctor is right, then Buddhist reincarnation is wrong. His experience corresponds exactly to what he expected from his Christian background, of Heaven in the clouds and angels showering advice and blessings on him.
Why is it the assumption that someone sharing an experience, is clearly trying to get fame and fortune for it? Just because someone has a book published doesn't mean that is what they are after. Has anyone faulted the Dalai Lama for all the books he writes and gets fame from? Or do we assume his reasons for doing so are valid and pure because of who he is, while everyone else is clearly out to make a buck?
Why is it the assumption that someone sharing an experience, is clearly trying to get fame and fortune for it? Just because someone has a book published doesn't mean that is what they are after. Has anyone faulted the Dalai Lama for all the books he writes and gets fame from? Or do we assume his reasons for doing so are valid and pure because of who he is, while everyone else is clearly out to make a buck?
And funnily enough people give less fault to the authors who write books for the sole purpose of making money, as a career. Oh us humans, sometimes I question our thinking.
If the Doctor is right, then Buddhist reincarnation is wrong. His experience corresponds exactly to what he expected from his Christian background, of Heaven in the clouds and angels showering advice and blessings on him.
So which is it?
True, just as you would expect a more skeptical view of his experience on a Buddhist forum.
If the Doctor is right, then Buddhist reincarnation is wrong. His experience corresponds exactly to what he expected from his Christian background, of Heaven in the clouds and angels showering advice and blessings on him.
'Chönyid bardo (Tibetan): is the fifth bardo of the luminosity of the true nature which commences after the final 'inner breath' (Sanskrit: prana, vayu; Tibetan: rlung). It is within this Bardo that visions and auditory phenomena occur. In the Dzogchen teachings, these are known as the spontaneously manifesting Thödgal (Tibetan: thod-rgyal) visions. Concomitant to these visions, there is a welling of profound peace and pristine awareness. Sentient beings who have not practiced during their lived experience and/or who do not recognize the clear light (Tibetan: od gsal) at the moment of death are usually deluded throughout the fifth bardo of luminosity.'
I wouldn't go so far as to say 'deluded' in a pejorative sense. What I'd suggest is that he reached the apex of his ascent, but in doing so sowed good karma for future practice of the dharma.
If the Doctor is right, then Buddhist reincarnation is wrong. His experience corresponds exactly to what he expected from his Christian background, of Heaven in the clouds and angels showering advice and blessings on him.
I have no idea where you got that idea from. Certainly the Buddha's discourses speak of divine beings (deva). The Buddha instructed these divine beings. They live in divine worlds for several thousand years, some of them feeding off of bliss, etc. There are hells, too, eight of them.
Some of the heavenly realms are Tusita which is situated above Yama heaven. Maitreya, the next Buddha lives in Tusita heaven. Life there lasts for 4,000 years.
All these deva enjoy sexual pleasure by way of copulation, embracing, contact with hands, smiling, and looking at one another. In Tushita heaven, where Maitreya resides, they hold hands to achieve and orgasm. Sweet!
Comments
His account can be found here.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/danweiss/heaven-is-real-and-its-a-schlep_b_1949918.html
The fact that he could title his book "Proof of Heaven" shows he either doesn't understand the concept of scientific proof or is ignoring it. He had a brain injury, and later remembers an experience. Just like all the other people who have a "near-death" experience. That is not proof of anything beyond people with trauma to their brains have strange memories.
There are many educated people who are firm believers in a Christian heaven and afterlife and that includes surgeons and scientists. Educated people are just as prone to forming beliefs without facts.
'who wants to saw at the branch of the tree he is sitting on?'
(and also, since we're Buddhists, pull out the root of the cloud).
Bottom line: It is not irrational to believe in NDEs, OBEs, SDEs, and that there is life after death and that we are greater than the sum of our biological parts. I will even say that QM predicts non-physical realities and by implication, non-physical states of being and beings (sattvas).
I have no idea whether what this doctor (who appears to be a rather impressive individual, based on his actual credentials...and is probably relatively rich to begin with) is espousing is correct or incorrect. And, like (I assume) most of you, I haven't read his book...just a short magazine article or watched a video that lasted a couple of minutes.
Oh, and by the way, is the title of the book what the author wanted, or the publishing company insisted on?
If this same guy wrote a book about rebirth that verified the Buddhist viewpoint, many people on this forum would be standing and applauding.
I'm glad we don't judge people here on this forum!
I also notice that despite his profound experience, he's trying to make money from it - especially so as he is using his credentials as a doctor to link with 'proof' in the title of his book.
I mean, don't follow the guy off a cliff because he says he sat on a cloud, but at the same time, your mind doesn't make life much fun when it instantly goes 'NDE - book - money - cynical ploy'.
However, the one thing I'm really disappointed in were the comments on the articles themselves. After reading them, the only conclusion I come to was that, since he holds a belief they don't have, then they automatically dismiss it. Without giving it any consideration that it could be true.
We as humans should have that curiosity, that thirst, of the unknown. Once we ignore the accounts (despite how, admittingly, subjective and anecdotal they are) and place ourselves in our own box, we become closed to the infinite possibilities that could be out there.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/10/07/proof-of-heaven-a-doctor-s-experience-with-the-afterlife.html
Much Buddhist thought is very negative, apophatic teaching. I think it's useful from time to time to get a little glimpse of just how good the fruit of the practice is.
There's a great story about a zen monk who comes to his master with a story just like the one above, about a great trip to heaven. The master doesn't even look up and says, 'keep practising'.
The next day the master and his disciple are eating strawberries, and the monk suddenly exclaims 'this is the best strawberry I've ever tasted'.
The master replies 'yes, that is enlightenment.'
You haven't read the book. You read an article by a magazine writer who probably didn't read the book yet, either. So you can't know that what he writes is "bizarre".
There's a tremendous difference between analyzing and attacking.
You are correct, nibbana is freedom from form and formlessness.
Looking at that painting, I'd go with schizophrenia rather than synesthesia,lol.
Have I changed my mind about rebirth? Yes. I used to not believe in it. Now I am open-minded about it. I accept it as one of several possibilities upon death.
In describing 'the all', the Buddha was describing samsara, not reality. But definitions here are mute.
Why would it - or should it - matter?
Behind the skeptic's thinking are assumptions about the way science works that a not true or accurate; which come from Logical Positivism. For example, science is value free. All truth is objective (whoops, good bye Mr. Buddha), reality is what can be tested and measured, and there is only one method for science by which all claims are to be verified. This is a bunch of rubbish. It was shot down by Popper, Hilary Putnam and others. In truth, science is really open-ended. There are any number of reality grids by which we can do science.
Scientific Method: 1 clearly describe the problem 2 make observations and tests 3 form a guess or hypothesis which describes the observations 4 more tests....
So just relax and let someone have a different hypothesis from your own!
Some of the great thinkers in the geological and geographical sciences were involved in what might be referred to as "descriptive geography and geology". Later, the statistician geologists and geographers came along...and pretty much confirmed what the descriptive geologists and geographers had long ago concluded. In fact, I would class Darwin as a descriptive scientist.
Edit: then again lots of things could be, so my point probably isn't that helpful.
You cannot surrender such a craving, because it isn't a craving; it's delusion's unmaking. You can only surrender to the deathless.
Which all help to extend life and make life a better place to live. I respect that kind of science yes.
So which is it?
I could write a book about auto-mechanics for money and that pursuit of money would not invalidate the info about cars.
Ihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bardo#Six_bardos_in_Tibetan_Buddhism
I wouldn't go so far as to say 'deluded' in a pejorative sense. What I'd suggest is that he reached the apex of his ascent, but in doing so sowed good karma for future practice of the dharma.
He might even be reading this thread :wave: .
Some of the heavenly realms are Tusita which is situated above Yama heaven. Maitreya, the next Buddha lives in Tusita heaven. Life there lasts for 4,000 years.
All these deva enjoy sexual pleasure by way of copulation, embracing, contact with hands, smiling, and looking at one another. In Tushita heaven, where Maitreya resides, they hold hands to achieve and orgasm. Sweet!