LIFE AFTER DEATH
1. The 'life' after death is the life of the
self as central nervous system brought 'face to face' with itself as soul.
2. For when the self, considered
physiologically, has nothing further to do in relation to the not-selves and/or
complementary manifestations of selflessness to which, in psychological mode,
it is ordinarily committed, it can only turn inwards, as to what is most
germane to itself.
3. Thus when there is no need of or cause for
the ego to concern itself with the functioning of bodily organs and their psychesomatic extrapolations, the ego ceases to exist, and
one is left with the self in and of itself, not so much impulsively, through
instinctual physiology, as soulfully, through emotional psyche.
4. For the soul is as far removed from the id,
the self as impulsive physiology, as it is possible to be, and thus is that
which is omega-most in the self, the centre or core of the self conceived psychocentrically.
5. Ordinarily one only achieves an accommodation
with the soul, with emotional psychocentricity, on an
intermittent and therefore imperfect basis, since the central nervous system is
primarily concerned with the body and its various organs, as already noted.
6. In death, however, the accommodation with the
soul is permanent and therefore perfect, insofar as there are no longer any
bodily distractions for the self to concern itself with either impulsively,
through the self as id, or consciously, through the self as ego.
7. Thus there is a sense in which death brings
one 'face to face' with the self-as-soul to such an extent that it is feasible
to equate this permanent condition with a sort of Eternity, even though the
actual condition of self-absorption only lasts for a specific duration ...
commensurate with the absence of extensive and/or intensive decomposition of one's
corpse.
8. For extensive and/or
intensive decomposition would ultimately effect the central nervous system no
less than the bodily organs in general, thereby eroding such self-absorption as
death had made possible.
9. Therefore the 'life-in-death' of the grave is
not eternal in the sense of lasting for ever, beyond the decay of the corpse,
but is perfect only in the somewhat narrower sense of being a permanent
condition rather than an intermittent one.
10. Yet even in death there would surely be a
gender-based distinction between how the central nervous system is experienced
by female corpses and how it is experienced by male corpses, with due objective
vis-à-vis subjective implications respectively.
11. Even genetic factors have to be taken into
account with death, since it is unlikely that people normally accustomed to metachemical and/or chemical manifestations of the soul in
life would experience the self in exactly the same way as those for whom
physical and/or metaphysical manifestations of soul were or had been the
habitual norm.
12. I fancy that as one had lived in life, so one
would 'live again' in death, with positive distinctions, where applicable,
between a loving relationship to self (noumenal), a
proud relationship to self (phenomenal), a pleasurable relationship to self
(phenomenal), and a joyful relationship to self (noumenal).
13. Hence when both gender and genetics have been
taken into account, it would seem that the Afterlife is no more reflective of an
'equality of all souls' than life itself, insofar as there are different types
of central nervous system with correspondingly different kinds of emotional
experience as a prevailing norm.
14. Yet even those kinds of emotional experience
which are less than holy, whether because they were earthy or purgatorial or
hellish, would be of an altogether purer and finer order in the grave than ever
they had been in life, when the soul had to contend with competition from the
ego and the ego, in turn, had to contend with competition from the id, which is
the self's impulsive approach to bodily management.
15. In fact, I happen to believe that, although
both the id and the ego play a part in managing the body, females are more
disposed to id-based impulsiveness than males, and accordingly tend to rely on
the id to manipulate bodily organs to a greater extent than their male
counterparts, who prefer, as a rule, the gentler or more indirect path of ...
psychological manipulation through egocentric consciousness.
16. Although I have no doubt that females
sometimes use the ego and males the id, I incline to the view that females
prefer, when possible, the direct path of manipulation in which nervous
physiology is instinctively applied to somatic physiology, with greater
emphasis, as a rule, on the objective organs of sensuality and sensibility than
on their subjective counterparts.
17. For it is the objective organs which, being
female, are more attuned to impulsive manipulation by the id, the physiological
instinct of the central nervous system, than their subjective counterparts, and
therefore it is feasible for females to by-pass the ego - much less subjective
as theirs happens to be anyway - in order to maximize the effectiveness with
which they are able to manipulate the, in particular, objective organs of
sensuality and sensibility to their powerful and/or glorious advantage.
18. However, even if males are more disposed to
consciously rather than impulsively manipulate the various not-selves to which
they relate, and all because that which, being subjective and male, tends to
work better when consciously manipulated or to require conscious manipulation,
as the case may be, they still find themselves in a position whereby the very
fact of having to manipulate bodily organs detracts from the calibre of mind
and/or soul to which, in superconscious and
subconscious terms, all egocentricity ultimately leads, and leads, be it
remembered, on an intermittent, as opposed to a permanent, basis.
19. More consciously rational and correspondingly
less unconsciously instinctual than females they may be, but even males do not
obtain in life the sort of soulful purity which only death can bring to light,
and therefore it must be said that, so far as the life of the soul is concerned,
it is death which grants to the self its maximum self-realization.
20. All life can do, on the other hand, is enable
one, within certain predetermined gender and/or genetic boundaries, to
cultivate one kind of soul rather than another, and thereby condition oneself,
in advance, for the type of afterlife experience which most corresponds to that
particular kind of soul, be it metachemical,
chemical, physical, or metaphysical. For
as one had lived in life, so shall one live again in death, albeit on a purer
and more permanent (eternal) basis.