"The Soul After Death"

Some time ago, I bought the book "The Soul After Death" by Fr. Seraphim Rose. It arrived about a week ago, and I have been reading it. I kind of regret that.

The book is disturbing, which is not a bad thing: I know all too well that it is easy to get complacent in the matter of our eternal life.

The book is also discouraging, for which I honestly struggle to find an excuse. The impression it gives when I put it aside a bit past half-way is that I am sure to go to Hell, it is too late to do anything about it, and neither Fr. Rose nor his God has a problem with that.

I think I should have stopped at Chapter 4, at the paragraph where he dismisses out of hand the possibility that a Protestant may have caught a glimpse of Heaven. Actually I agree that the vision used as example is unlikely to be of the Heaven of saints; that is not the problem. The problem is the unreflected and unconcerned certainty that you have to be an official member of an earthly organization to not be condemned collectively. Actually it soon becomes clear that even if you are a member of the Orthodox Church, your chances are pretty slim, but at least you may get a fair trial. This is simply taken as an axiom, a starting point, though I suppose it may be elaborated on in other works.

Unless you follow the particulars of the Orthodox path (in this work not specified, but hinted to be some sort of asceticism), you can be assured that any impulse you receive, even if it is toward gratitude and love for others, comes from evil spirits. Any comfort and bliss you may experience is sure to come from demons.

If I were to take this book seriously, I would conclude that the Presence that has been with me since my youth, which once made the Scriptures come alive to me, which has advised me against evil and encouraged me toward good, which has forgiven me and comforted me through the years, must certainly be a demon. I find that hard to believe.

I may be harsh, but that is the impression the book leaves with me, and I suspect it could be even worse for those not already favorably inclined toward Orthodoxy. Strongly dis-recommended for those not in the choir he is preaching to.

It is rare that I even consider burning a book, but the risk of this work falling into the hand of a doubting soul after my passing is something I am not sure I want to have on my conscience. I have someone with depression in my close family who might inherit my bookshelf if I were to pass away soon. I don't want to risk their life. While I assume the book must have some positive value for some people, I fear that it may be too dangerous for outsiders.

I think I should say that I actually agree with Fr Rose on his main points, I am just horrified by his vision of a world where God has basically lost against Satan, being content with getting a few elite souls while the rest of mankind is and remains completely under the thumbs of demons, the good people with the bad. The word "dystopia" is far too mild. It is more like "second-worst case scenario" and one would tend to agree with the sci-fi author that "In the beginning God created the universe; this was widely considered a bad move."

More first-world problems

I should probably clarify the previous entry. A helpful voice in my head pointed out that I would probably not have written it like that if I was starving and had no food nearby, or if I was sitting on a rock in the winter. Likewise I would probably not belittle the need for security if I was a jobless cancer patient in America. All of which is true, although someone else might have done so under those circumstances or worse.

Perhaps we could say that outer circumstances tend to set one limit, while the soul of the individual sets another.

Maslow's hierarchy of needs, at the face of it, without context, is simply pure materialism: The naïve belief that humans can improve simply by getting more stuff. But humans are made of both matter and spirit. If it were not so, it would not really matter (no pun intended) whether we progressed to self-actualization, since there would be no self to actualize.

Even when we have fulfilled a lower level of existence, there are several things holding us back from progressing to a higher: Culture, subculture, family values and upbringing, neuroses, habits and simply our own free will. But by using the one little part we can actually do something about, we can gradually begin to move.

First-world problems?

With all due respect for Maslow, his hierarchy of needs imply that higher needs such as the need to realize truth, beauty and virtue come as an afterthought after you've got everything you ever wanted. History shows that this is not true.

1) History shows that through the times, there have been people living under pretty harsh conditions by our standards, who have gone on to bring Heaven down to Earth to an extent that is baffling just to look at.

2) Recent history shows that an increase in affluence has not really led to a mass migration up the pyramid to a more refined soul. Rather, people seem to become more active at or near their original level. Those at the basic level eat more (although some throw up afterwards), they have more sex (even if they need to take medication to keep it up) and they do it with more people. The vast majority, though, seem to be stuck at the "belonging" level: They can't ever get enough recognition from others, and their life becomes a desperate and endless fight to show that they are Good Enough and then some. In so far that some people transcend the lower levels and take an interest in spirituality, they will likely as not simply end up as paying consumers of spiritual entertainment, in which any superstition is as good as any other, if the wrapping is pretty.

My conclusion is not that poverty is cool. I am glad people live longer, healthier lives. But I think history shows us that money does not change people for the better, rather they just become more of what they already are.