The reason for the antipathies we suffer on Earth

Laughing Fool, J. Cornelisz van Oostsanen (circa 1500). Source: Wikipedia.

(...) A wrong-doing, misguided spirit feels hostile towards anyone who can see into its inner nature. When it meets such a person for the first time, it unconsciouly anticipates that person's disapproaval. Its aversion then changes into hatred or jealously and inspires it with a desire to do that person harm. A good spirit, on the other hand, feels discomfort and the need to keep a certain distance, knowing it will be met with contempt because of the difference in feelings and attitudes. But strong in its own superiority, it will neither hate nor feel jealously towards the other. It will feel compassion for the person. (A. Kardec, "The Spirits Book" [1], answer to Question 391.)

Translation from the original post in Portuguese: A razão das antipatias que sofremos na Terra. Link (2024): https://eradoespirito.blogspot.com/2020/08/a-razao-das-antipatias-que-sofremos-na.html

Spiritist knowledge encompasses more than only the study of spiritist manifestations or the mechanisms that connect the spirit and the perispirit. This study, which is still in its early stages, allows us to objectively grasp a variety of effects, both positive and negative, that we encounter throughout our lives. 

This knowledge is founded on the new vision that revelation provides, particularly of the true reason for human life. True, modern psychology provides processes and makes recommendations on how we should behave mentally in our daily lives. However, the revelation of the Spirits provides additional components that allow us to absorb these recommendations more sensibly. Every psychological treatment is evidently rational in the sense that it aims to improve life and restore happiness and calm. However, any and all new teachings that contribute to this goal should be similarly encouraged. Knowing your reason for existing and your ultimate goal is the most important life lesson you can learn.

The causes of the sympathies, but mainly, antipathies that we face in life are well described in Chapter VII of the 2nd Part of "The Spirits' Book". Still inspired by the difficulties of the "Return of the Spirit to Bodily Life" (Chapter VII), an entire section is dedicated to "earthly sympathy and antipathy." It is vital to note that there is nothing intrinsically bad or good about two Spirits feeling, say, reciprocal hostility. This is extremely evident in the response to Question 390:

Spirits do not necessarily have bad natures because they are not well attuned. The antipathy may spring from a dissimilarity in their way of thinking. But as the spirits evolve, these differences fade away; and aversions disappear.

As a result of this independence, antipathy does not originate initially in the spirit of lower nature: "It may begin simultaneously on the part of both" states the beginning of question 391, the second part of which we can read at the beginning of this post. Although the antipathy is mutual, it produces various responses in each Spirit.

In the lower spirit, it exacerbates pre-existing feelings of envy, wrath, and the "desire to do evil". As a result, even though the feeling is reciprocal, the lowest part almost always takes the lead in regrettable behavior, persecution, insult, or slander, acts that, if not restrained, are the root cause of many crimes that we see every day in many newspapers.

"My mother doesn't like me" or dislikes in the family.

A superficial reading of the issue we study here could lead us to believe that the spirits were merely referring to 'fortuitous' antipathies we meet in our lives, such as difficulties between friends or at work. However, the hardest lesson for incarnated spirits is having to endure hostility within their own family. Because, as a result of the spirits' teaching, a mother, father, or children have no intrinsic or genetic responsibility to love each other if they are unsympathetic spirits.

Many may be shocked by these conclusions, but the sense of revolt is, in fact, a result of cultural preconceptions and what is considered 'normal', rather than the hidden reality of the greater life that is well demonstrated in specific cases. In fact, the rules of affinity between spirits and their past lives explain many of the conflicts that occur among families. Many people ask why, but the explanation is well given. We emphasize that such spirits can be antipathetic toward each other but not necessarily wicked.

However, it makes no difference what color, culture, familial ties, or education a person has if they engage in acts such as racism, bullying, systematic persecution for useless reasons, and so on. They will always be proof of their spirits' inferior nature, which will be corrected in the future. On the other hand, it is far preferable for parents and children to adhere to the values of respect and fairness despite their personal animosities.

It is also incorrect to believe that our animosity for someone close or distant in our family is exclusively based on past lives. This is frequently claimed among Spiritists, but a close reading of the part we reviewed here in [1] yields this logical conclusion, which also applies to affinities:

Two spirits who have affinity may naturally gravitate toe each other, without prior acquaintance as incarnate beings. (Question 387)

Once mutual distaste is acknowledged, each person must strive to prevent disagreements and build a culture of mutual respect. This occurs more naturally among people whose spirits are more developed morally. When antipathy is identified, aversion against the circumstance arises, as does a desire to flee or distance from the other. According to the spirits, this is entirely natural, and the situation fits under the category of "vicissitudes" of life, which are tests that spirits must go through to better control their emotions and develop their personalities.

There is no specific question in "The Spirits' Book" about what occurs when two Spirits achieve equal levels of enlightenment but are antipathetic. However, the response is clearly a logical consequence of the stated premises. Furthermore, the answer to Question 390 states that truly great spirits do not preserve antipathies since they are no longer influenced by inferior passions. Thus, when they grow up spiritually, "antipathy will cease to exist." This is not to say that they do not have antipathies while on a mission on Earth. In fact, this is what happens most of the time since their nature is so distinct from their surroundings.

Antipathies among the less developed spirits

However, there is still the extremely difficult challenge of dealing with the hostility that develops between spirits of lower nature. As long as reason does not intervene and persuade both parties that maintaining the necessary distance is in their best interests, the relationship almost always descends into a downward spiral of feelings, beginning with the abusive practice of unjustified persecution, which can lead to crimes, some of which are hideous. They instigate each other since they can't figure out what's causing the animosity. They thus accumulate debts that can only be repaid in later lives, usually always in even more severe circumstances. Many people who share common lives around these spirits suffer greatly or develop into actual adversarial groups or avowed foes.

Detail of "Christ carrying the cross" by Hieronymus Bosch (1490).

Unable to understand the source of the concealed antipathy - whether due to a lack of natural affinity or shared acknowledgment of causes in the past - the escalation of evil that fuels spirits' antipathies can only be counterbalanced by forgiveness of offenses. This is the most difficult lesson that spirits still attached to evil must learn: forgive the faults and failings of those who show themselves as opponents.

It's probable to imagine that they'll keep fighting until they reach the stage of discernment. Personal interests bind them together in the crucible of frivolous feelings. They are unable to forgive, so they punish their opponents. By doing so they reap disappointments and sorrow for an extended amount of time while experiencing brief happiness that fires their sensations at the time even more. There is no turning back until the anguish caused by this corrodes all courage to do evil and gives birth to light in the soul. Repentance precedes forgiveness since the spirit gradually realizes that the old method of acting does not satisfy it anymore. The spirit's inner being becomes a vast field of regeneration. Here and there, however, it will still encounter its antipathies, from which, now redeemed, it will try to evade in peace.

This will continue until the spirit is totally changed in its psychological structure and becomes so morally solid that nothing can upset it. Then it will have attained true salvation.

Societies, like spirits, evolve by recognizing the source of evil and systematically rejecting it. But that's a topic for a future post.

Reference

[1] A. Kardec. The Spirit's Book. Citations in this texts follow the published version by: Allan Kardec Educational Society. (1996). ISBN 0-9649907-0-9

Near-death experiences: considerations on recent conventional explanations

In the ecstatic state, the obliteration of the physical body is almost complete. The body no longer possesses anything beyond organic life. The soul is held by a single thread, which would rupture forever with only a small effort. In such a state, all earthly thoughts disappear, replaced by perceptions that constitute the very essence of the immaterial being. Absorbed completely in this sublime contemplation, the soul views earthly life as only a temporary stay. The successes and misfortunes of the material world, its gross joys and afflictions, appear as so many trifling incidents on a journey, the end of which the soul feels lucky to glimpse. 

(A. Kardec, "The Spirit's Book, Chapter IX, "The liberation of the soul".)   

Translation from the original post in Portuguese: Experiências de quase-morte: considerações sobre explicações convencionais recentes.. Link (2024): https://eradoespirito.blogspot.com/2022/09/experiencias-de-quase-morte.html

We received a proposal to publicize more recent NDEs (or "near-death experiences"). What has changed since our first texts [1] on the subject? Many such experiences were reported throughout time. Readers can visit websites like the International Association for Near-Death Studies (IANDS), its specialized Journal of Near-Death Studies, or the Near-Death Experience Research Foundation (NDERF). These sites are dedicated to collecting and studying near-death experience stories systematically.

From 2012 to 2022, what did the academic community say about the subject? The term "academic community" might refer to people who do not agree with some of the pioneering researchers on the subject, such as R. Moody, S. Parnia [3], or Dr. Bruce Greyson [4]. These researchers contributed to the mainstream media's coverage of these events. They highlight the atypical nature of NDE reports, including the fact that they "suggest" the continuation of life after death.

A discussion has naturally developed between advocates of the "survivalist" hypothesis (suggesting the experiences reveal a deeper reality beyond life) and others who deny this. Examples of opinions in this last direction can be found in [2], [2b], [5], [6], and [7]. This is apparently reasonable because there is no comprehensive theory of consciousness, which is seen as a result of brain activity. According to the majority of academics, NDEs are simply normal brain reactions in times of life's perils, similar to the phenomenon of "thanatosis" in insects.

The lack of a theory of consciousness

Problems begin with the appropriate definitions of "brain death." This definition is fundamental to understanding the phenomenon since everyone who reported the experience survived. In other words, the brain was not actually "dead", despite the cardiac arrest.

To gain an understanding of the current uncertainty, we must evaluate considerable research mapping brain areas and their associations with core cognitive functions. Such functions are considered to be "generated" or "processed" in highly specific regions of the brain. This is equivalent to arguing that the brain tissue in these locations is responsible for cognitive operations. This idea, however, is undercut by the concept of "brain plasticity" in patients who have severe damage to specific sections of the brain yet have little effect on their cognitive behavior. Plasticity is described as the "capacity of the brain to alter its structure and function" [8]. Given this, what actually drives cognitive functions? Instead of focusing on specific regions and tissues, the explanation requires acknowledging that the brain as a whole is the source, rendering mapping somewhat unnecessary from a fundamental standpoint. In summary: the phenomenon itself is regarded as the cause.

The "complexity" of the connections between the billions and billions of neurons that make up the brain makes it even more difficult to identify the root cause. This complexity would be the source, according to the current explanation, with the variety, richness, and multiplicity of conscious experiences the result of an organization that is inaccessible on a tiny scale. Any explanation is possible, but such an idea may impose severe obstacles to the correct understanding of NDE.

These methodological challenges can be seen in one of the first studies to appear to fully record brain activity following a death. As detailed in [9], it was only completed in 2022. There are obvious practical and ethical challenges, such as securing family permission to do scientific research on a loved member who has been diagnosed with an irreversible clinical disease and is about to die.

Current conventional opinion

Reference [2b] summarizes the mood among defenders of conventional explanations. The author considers:

I accept the reality of these intensely felt experiences. They are as authentic as any other subjective feeling or perception. As a scientist, however, I operate under the hypothesis that all our thoughts, memories, percepts and experiences are an ineluctable consequence of the natural causal powers of our brain rather than of any supernatural ones. That premise has served science and its handmaiden, technology, extremely well over the past few centuries. Unless there is extraordinary, compelling, objective evidence to the contrary, I see no reason to abandon this assumption.

There is certainly a problem with the perception of causation here. Survival is described as a "supernatural experience" without clarifying what this entails: would a break from the natural order be required in the survival theory? Furthermore, it is obvious that the brain filters all NDE experiences, just as it does with normal cognitive experiences. Nonetheless, the latter are given the property of "reality" that exists independently of brain "recreation". However, standard brain explanations fail to explain how this is possible. It makes no difference, neurologically speaking, whether "the brain sees an external light bulb on" or "imagines seeing a light bulb" (the same brain regions are involved in perceiving and imagining something).

This passage in [2] summarizes the usual explanation, which lacks any reference information from external reality:

Not surprisingly, many have seized on NDEs as evidence of life after death, heaven and the existence of god. The descriptions of leaving the body and blissful unity with the universal seem almost scripted from religious beliefs about souls leaving the body at death and ascending toward heavenly bliss. But these experiences are shared across a broad range of cultures and religions so it’s not likely that they are all reflections of specific religious expectations. Instead, that commonality suggests that NDEs might arise from something more fundamental than religious or cultural expectations. Perhaps NDEs reflect changes in how the brain functions as we approach death.

In short, the consistency and uniformity of reports are linked to a "generalized religious belief" that is the result of common events in the brain. The universality of experience stems from the universal biology of what happens in the dying brain.

The objectivity, and convincingness of NDEs must be sought in the character of the independent "external reality" that some reports demonstrate and which defies conventional explanations.

The link between NDEs and external reality

It is quite clear that if NDEs continue to be "meaningful, lived experiences" for those who experience them, nevertheless, they will remain as indistinguishable as "normal" fantasy states as well. This significant and profound feature is irrelevant to the conventional view of the mind as a product of the brain. Whatever you imagine or experience will always be a private experience, and hence a fantasy created by brain neurons.

But is it exactly what NDEs report? The current interest of neuroscientists in NDE cases often goes far away from previous reports in the specialized literature on "true NDEs" [10]. This term refers to NDEs in which patients describe exterior world events that they would be unable to know in their current state and body position. There are other recorded examples, one of which has already been described here [10b].  However, it is often the case many academic opinions simply dismiss such examples as "pure fiction".

Stripp argues in a recent paper [11] that the academic community purposely ignores accounts of authentic NDEs in conformity with the mainstream "reductionist bias". Stripp accurately considers the "ontological and epistemological fallacies" linked with NDEs [12]:

Such a statement is based on ontological materialistic assumptions. These are assumptions that the authors fail to mention or discuss, leading to a circular reasoning fallacy: since everything is only biology, NDEs have a biological purpose. I am not arguing against a commonality among all humans but suggesting that commonality may not necessarily amass solely to the biological components constituting the human body. We simply do not know all that ties us together. Furthermore, pure objectivity is, in many views, impossible, as there will always be some subjectivity and human decision in all research. Also, this subjectivity introduces a bias that one should reflect critically upon. Even the most common axioms of science are human constructs and should be treated as such.

In other words, when truly veridic evidence is supplied, the reports are not deemed sufficiently "objective" to warrant "academic credit" under the ostensible need for objectivity. However, this is irreconcilable with the very nature of the phenomenon being examined.

This lack of deference is carefully chosen so that only narratives that fit the dominant materialist viewpoint are reported to make sense. Many conventional methodologies, as a result, wind up focusing just on parts of the phenomenon that appear to be well explained by what researchers believe from the start. For example, reducing NDEs to "drug-induced hallucinations" is one strategy for deconstructing the reports' rich phenomenology [12]. Some researchers [13] have condemned this approach, which cannot be called scientific.

This situation, in our opinion, is regrettable from a "scientific" viewpoint, but completely understandable. It will be impossible to promote a change in academic thought without doing comprehensive studies on NDE experiences.  In fact, what will be most "extraordinary" to accomplish is a complete shift of thinking about the subject. Because these are data that must be "collected in passing" (as Kardec would say), it will be extremely difficult to establish any form of rigorous control over their frequency, occurrence, and assessment. It would be analogous to attempting to fully understand sporadic events that occur on a huge scale in nature in closed laboratories. Despite attempts to fit NDE events into preconceived notions and mental disorders, they present and will always supply very persuasive evidence of the truth of life's survival.

References

[1] Reflexões sobre o contexto de experiências de quase-morte: artigo de Michael Nahm (2011). https://eradoespirito.blogspot.com/2012/11/reflexoes-sobre-o-contexto-de.html

[2] R. Martone (2019). "New Clues Found in Understanding Near-Death Experiences".https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/new-clues-found-in-understanding-near-death-experiences/

[2b] C. Koch (2020). What Near-Death Experiences Reveal about the Brain. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-near-death-experiences-reveal-about-the-brain/

[3] What Happens When We Die (Dr. Sam Parnia): https://eradoespirito.blogspot.com/2011/11/livro-iii-o-que-acontece-quando.html

[4] Near-Death Experiences (NDEs). https://med.virginia.edu/perceptual-studies/our-research/near-death-experiences-ndes/

[5] Evrard, R., Pratte, E., & Rabeyron, T. (2022). Sawing the branch of near‐death experience research: A critical analysis of Parnia et al.’s paper. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[6] Hannah Flynn (2022). When are we really dead? New study sheds light. https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/when-are-we-really-dead-new-study-sheds-light

[7] Martial, C., Gosseries, O., Cassol, H., & Kondziella, D. (2022). Studying death and near-death experiences requires neuroscientific expertise. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. https://orbi.uliege.be/bitstream/2268/293819/1/comment%20on%20parnia%20et%20al_final.pdf

[8] Kolb, B., & Whishaw, I. Q. (1998). Brain plasticity and behavior. Annual review of psychology, 49(1), 43-64.

[9] Vicente, R., Rizzuto, M., Sarica, C., Yamamoto, K., Sadr, M., Khajuria, T., ... & Zemmar, A. (2022). Enhanced interplay of neuronal coherence and coupling in the dying human brain. Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 80.

[10] Ring, K., & Lawrence, M. (1993). Further evidence for veridical perception during near-death experiences. Journal of Near-Death Studies, 11(4), 223-229.

• https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Madelaine-Lawrence/publication/226754118_Further_evidence_for_veridical_perception_during_near-death_experiences/links/0fcfd513923c05c0e5000000/Further-evidence-for-veridical-perception-during-near-death-experiences.pdf

[10b] Experimentum crucis: EQMs em pessoas cegas.https://eradoespirito.blogspot.com/2013/04/experimentum-crucis-eqms-em-pessoas.html

[11] Stripp, T. K. (2022). Near-death experiences and the importance of transparency in subjectivity, ontology and epistemology. Brain Communications, 4(1), fcab304.

[12] Van Lommel, P. (2011). Near‐death experiences: the experience of the self as real and not as an illusion. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1234(1), 19-28.

[13] Moreira-Almeida, A., Costa, M. D. A., & Coelho, H. S. (2022). Cultural Barriers to a Fair Examination of the Available Evidence for Survival. In Science of Life After Death (pp. 73-77). Springer, Cham.