Near-Death Experiences in Retrospect
By now it should be abundantly apparent that the
positive human encounter with Divinity -- with light and ecstasy
-- spans cultures and the ages. Whether it be a Hindu yogi centuries
before Christ was born, or a middle class, not especially religious
person in the United States, the phenomenon continues to be reported
in surprisingly similar terms. While there is no firm agreement
on exactly what -- or who -- it might be that the experiencer
encounters, it can be said that the person considers it to be
profoundly real; the ultimate; the experience par excellence.
For the Jew, Christian or Muslim it is God. For the Hindu it is
the discovery of the true soul (Atman), which happens to be identical
with the true God (Brahman). Buddhists refer to it as the Ultimate
Reality; nirvana; the Clear Light of the Void, or Buddha.
A modern near-death experiencer might well also believe that he
or she has encountered God, or the person might simply use more
descriptive terminology such as "an unconditionally loving Being
of Light." Divinity, of course, means different things to different
people. The description of the experience itself, however, remains
remarkably consistent no matter who is telling it.
However, the near-death experience has not gained
general acceptance by scientists and academics as being any sort
of an encounter with the Divine by a "soul" that survives death.
In fact, a fairly extensive literature has developed criticizing
contending the contrary. The trouble with these critics, though,
is that not all agree on exactly what the cause of the experience
might be. Theories range from the influence of an unusual flow
of brain chemicals; to the reaction of the dying brain to reduced
levels of oxygen; or to purely psychological factors such as dreams,
hallucinations, or wish fulfilment. While all of these criticisms
offer interesting possibilities, none of them rise above the level
of speculation. In short, the critics have no better claim to
what the experience really means than anyone else.
Still, critics have raised many points that are
well worth considering. One possibility is that the experience
could be induced under the influence of drugs. As Aldous Huxley
first published in 1954, drugs such as mescaline can induce mystical
states very similar to the ones that are under investigation.
In The Doors of Perception and Heaven and Hell, Huxley
wrote,
What are the common features which this pattern
imposes upon our visionary experiences? First and most important
is the experience of light. Everything seen by those who visit
the mind's antipodes is brilliantly illuminated and seems to
shine from within. All colours are intensified to a pitch far
beyond anything seen in the normal state, and at the same time
the mind's capacity for recognizing fine distinctions of tone
and hue is notably heightened.1
Huxley's observations led in part, of course, to the 1960s drug
culture. Well known authors, as well as respectable academic researchers,
investigated the validity of drug-induced mystical experiences.
In 1966, researchers Walter Pahnke and William Richards found
that LSD could produce experiences that correspond to the essential
categories found in the literature dealing with mysticism. These
include unity, changes in one's perception of objectivity and
reality, transcendence, sacredness, paradoxicality, ineffability,
transiency, a very positive mood and positive changes in attitude
and behaviour.2 Similarly, author
Alan Watts, philosophy of religion professor Huston Smith, and
psychoanalyst Stanislav Grof have concluded that psychedelic drugs
such as mescaline, LSD and psilocybin are capable of inducing
mystical experiences.3
Further, psychedelic drugs seem to be able to induce
NDEs or something very much like an NDE. Ronald Siegal found that
PCP can induce an experience very much like an NDE. This includes
images of tunnels and lights; out-of-body states; spirit guides,
and a life or memory review. Siegal concludes that this indicates
that NDEs are some form of hallucination that uses images already
stored in the brain.4 Similarly,
J.W. Provonsha found similarities between NDEs and experiences
induced by psychedelic drugs, and carbon dioxide. Provonsha asks
rhetorically if NDEs are, by extension, really the work of psychochemicals.
This would mean that the NDE is really an experience of the dying
process, not death itself.5
D. Scott Rogo, in the same vein, has reviewed the literature on
the parallels between NDEs and the effects of anaesthetics, particularly
ketamine. He concludes that while no direct causal parallel can
be drawn between the two, the parallels are strong enough to cast
doubt on purely metaphysical explanations of the NDE.6
Interestingly, psychedelic drugs can even have
some of the beneficial after-effects as those who have undergone
an actual NDE. Walter Pahnke found that the majority of terminally
ill cancer patients who were administered LSD benefitted from
the treatment. The after-effects included lessened anxiety and
depression, as well as a reduced fear of death.7
William Richards also concluded that after having been administered
LSD, one third of terminal cancer patients experienced dramatic
improvement in outlook regarding their condition. Death was no
longer regarded by these patients as an end to all personal existence,
but rather "as a transition to different type of existence."8
Stanislav Grof found similar, but even more positive results:
27 of 31 patients administered LSD showed improvements in the
same areas noted by Pahnke, and those who had "peak" experiences
such as unity, transcendence, and sacredness ended up having the
most positive and lasting attitude changes of all.9
By extension, some argue that the brain itself can
manufacture chemicals that act very much like their artificial
psychedelic counterparts. Endocrinologist Daniel Carr has argued
that beta-endorphins and similar brain chemicals that are released
during the dying process might very well trigger the NDE.10
Even changes to blood pressure in the inner ear can produce the
sensation of rising out of the body, floating away in space, and
even near-death visions.11
Several critics of the metaphysical model of the
near-death experience argue that levels of oxygen to the brain
-- of which varying levels are found in people who are about to
die -- can trigger images commonly reported in NDEs. Richard S.
Blacher, in an early rebuttal to Raymond Moody's claim that the
NDE constitutes evidence of the survival of bodily death, claims
that those who have had NDE-like experiences of the type that
Moody describes are likely suffering from hypoxia.12
Neurologist Ernst A. Rodin claims that NDEs are simply hallucinations
or delusions caused by the deprivation of oxygen to the brain,
and says so on the ground that he himself had had a near-death
experience.13
Critics of this brand of critic have plenty to
say in rebuttal. First, of course, not all of those who have had
an NDE were under the influence of any drugs or anaesthetics.
Moreover, beta-endorphins cannot in and of themselves account
for the whole of the NDE, only perhaps the part dealing with feelings
of well? being or ecstasy. Cardiologist Michael B. Sabom takes
exception to Blacher's claims that NDEs result from hypoxia. Sabom
counter-claims that persons suffering from that condition typically
end up with a confused and muddled memory, quite the opposite
of the clarity found in the NDE.14
Further, Sabom claims that Rodin's personal experience might not
be a genuine NDE at all.15 Ian
Stevenson agrees with Sabom that oxygen deprivation to the brain
typically induces a "toxic psychosis," but this is not at all
the kind of report given by those who have had an NDE. Rather
the latter "never have been more alive and aware."16
Other critics have used psychological counter-explanations
of the metaphysical model of the NDE. In another response to Ernst
Rodin's article mentioned above, Nathan Schnaper supports Rodin's
contention that NDEs are probably delusions or hallucinations.
Schnaper extends Rodin's thesis, however, to include other possible
sources for the experience. These include considerations of physiology
(hypoxia, anoxia, etc.); pharmacology (ketamine and other anaesthetics
and pharmaceuticals); and psychology (dissociative reaction, panic,
psychosis etc.). The great public interest in the NDE phenomenon
is best understood as death denial.17
Ronald K. Siegal also contends that NDEs are hallucinations,
brought about by psychological and neurophysiological factors,
although he admits that those processes are not yet fully understood.
Like Schnaper, Siegal maintains that NDEs are a product of a human
imagination longing for an afterlife.18 Jan
Ehrenwald agrees that "most claims of survival near death or after
resuscitation result from a blend of hallucinatory wish fulfilment
and massive denial of illness in terms of defensive maneuvers."19
Russel Noyes, Jr., concurs that NDE occurrences such as depersonalization
serve as a defense mechanism against the threat of death. The
"life review" and other sweeping recollections are likely a result
of the dying person attaching him/herself to memories that will
act as reminders of their own existence.20
Susan Blackmore adds that while NDEs are indeed hallucinations,
visions of a tunnel and/or a great light are most likely the result
of activity in the visual cortex of a dying brain. Survivors transform
these images into objective concepts drawn from sensory experience.21
Psychoanalysts have come up with some possible explanations
of the NDE phenomenon. According to Uri Lowenthal, the bliss felt
during an NDE is an infantile regression to the memory of the
bliss felt under a mother's protection. Likewise, the "dark tunnel"
is a recollection of the mother's birth canal, and the "bright
light" would be a memory of the mother's radiant face.22
Similarly, Glen Gabbard and Stuart Twemlow surmise that when viewed
psychoanalytically, the "being of light" may represent an internalized
parent.23 Mortimer Ostow and
N. Lukianowicz agree that the NDE can be explained in part by
ego wish fulfilment.24
Some social scientists have concluded that NDEs
are akin to a dreams that seem very real. Anthropologist Dorothy
Counts found that in New Guinea, the culturally structured nature
of out-of-body and NDE accounts suggests that both are the product
of a state of mind known as hypnagogic sleep.25
Similarly, Celia Green has argued that certain aspects of NDEs
such as out-of-body experiences and the travel through a tunnel
are very much like the lucid dream phenomenon, where the subject
is aware that he or she is dreaming.26
The field of sensory deprivation also has application
to the near-death phenomenon. John C. Lilly observed that some
subjects in sensory deprivation tanks experienced the "out of
body" sensation.27 Even more
suggestive is the story of two miners who were trapped underground
for six days. The two had hallucinations that included people,
a cross, a heavenly garden, and blue lights. The authors of this
work conclude that under conditions as stressful as this, hallucinations
serve to address perceived needs.28
Psychological explanations of NDEs have raised
some very interesting analogies from various aspects of the field.
However, none as yet constitute proof that the NDE is caused by
one factor or another. There might very well be some truth in
some or all of these explanations, but we have not yet seen any
definitive explanation for the whole phenomenon.
In her 1993 book, Dying to Live: Science and
the Near-Death Experience, Susan Blackmore has tried to debunk
all aspects of the metaphysical explanations of the NDE. She agrees
that NDE accounts are consistent; however, this does not constitute
proof of an afterlife. Blackmore draws upon various aspects of
modern science to demonstrate her contention. For example, the
joy and peace people experience are a result of "natural opiates
released under stress." The "life review is consistent because
the endorphins cause random activation and seizures in the temporal
lobe and limbic system where memories are organized." Positive
transformations in one's life can be attributed to the fact that
one is now thinking about death, which in and of itself is enough
to make one "less selfish and more concerned for others." Blackmore
concludes that the dying brain hypothesis best explains the near-death
phenomenon. She goes on to say that there really is no "soul"
to survive death: "We are simply here and this is how it is. I
have no self and 'I' own nothing. There is no one to die. There
is just this moment, and now this and now this."29
Again, Blackmore has come up with some interesting
possibilities regarding the causes of the NDE, but the work is
really as conjectural as the metaphysical model. Even though the
book is subtitled "'Science' and the near-death experience," this
is not a scientific analysis of the phenomenon. We only have a
collection of various studies from various fields of science that,
when put together, give us a physical and psychological alternative
to the metaphysical understanding of the NDE. This is really an
exposition of the author's and likeminded individual's beliefs,
not anything that approaches scientific proof.
Further, as the mystical traditions of the world's
religions have shown, one does not have to be near death in order
to experience key elements of an NDE. In fact the encounter with
the "Divine Light" and the accompanying ecstasy can be achieved
by a number of means, none of which have anything to do with a
dying brain. Until we see something more substantial from those
who postulate a purely physical and/or psychological cause for
the NDE, metaphysical arguments are still well worth considering.
One point that Blackmore raised that might well
be worth developing further from a metaphysical point of view
is the concept of self. Blackmore prefers what she defines as
the Buddhist position that "neither self nor anything pertaining
to self can truly and really be found."30
Unfortunately, whether intentionally or not, this leaves the impression
that Buddhism advocates some form of pure materialism. This is
far from the truth. While Buddhism does propose that ultimately
the self does not exist, and that the truth beyond the self is
nothingness, this does not mean that nothingness is "blackness,"
or has no intrinsic reality. On the contrary, as we have seen,
some scriptures such as the Tibetan Book of the Dead speak of
the "Clear Light of the Void." For Buddhists, the void is vividly
real, the ultimate reality, and hardly the cynical non-existence
tacitly referred to by Western atheistical materialists.
Ironically, Blackmore's reference to the Buddhist
conception of self can lead us to a new metaphysical understanding
of the nature and meaning of life and death. It might very well
be that the soul does not continue to exist indefinitely beyond
death, whether in "heaven" or in some form of reincarnation. Buddhist
philosophy allows us to see that there might very well be a state
of being beyond this life and even beyond the near-death experience.
We will explore this metaphysic in the concluding chapter.
|