|
The
Dubious Appeal of Immortality
by Mano Singham
During the time I was a Christian, I took
it for granted that immortality was not only a Good Thing,
it was the thing that mattered most. The idea that if one
believes
in Jesus (or in some other way meets the needs of Christian
doctrine), one is saved and has eternal life is a central
tenet of Christianity.
The formulation "For God so loved the world that he gave
his only begotten son that whosoever believes in him shall not
perish but have eternal life" is something that any
Christian can recite. It makes up the famous verse John 3:16
which you
will often see written on a bed sheet and draped over railings
at big sporting events. (This passage is so familiar to Christians
that I was able to type it out accurately after all these
years without even looking it up.)
What is surprising is that despite
all the emphasis on going to heaven as the main point of living,
the Bible contains very
few actual descriptions of the place and what people there
actually do. Even the good folks at Rapture Ready, who are counting
the
minutes until the world ends and they get taken up, admit that
they don't have much data on this key question. Their page
What Heaven Will Be Like is very brief. (Disturbingly, for me personally
at least, it says that in heaven the laws of physics do not
apply.
Why is this information not given to students when they are
deciding what to major in? In the unlikely event that I am raptured,
all
my years of study and work will have been wasted and in heaven
I will have to learn a new trade.)
The one really concrete description
comes from (where else?) the Book of Revelations and it says
that everyone in heaven
will live in a place called New Jerusalem, which consists
of a cube
of side 1,500 miles. Although large (roughly the size of
the moon), it should be easy to visit friends since the Rapture
Ready website says that people in heaven will be able to
travel
instantaneously,
presumably because of their ability to circumvent the laws
of physics that are such restrictive nuisances for us on
Earth.
Islam is more detailed than Christianity
in its descriptions of heaven. Ibn Warraq writes in Virgins? What
virgins? that
the Koran gives the following description:
What of the rewards
in paradise? The Islamic paradise is described in great sensual
detail in the Koran and the
Traditions; for
instance, Koran sura 56 verses 12-40 ; sura 55 verses
54-56 ; sura 76 verses 12-22. I shall quote the celebrated Penguin
translation
by NJ Dawood of sura 56 verses 12-39: "They shall
recline on jewelled couches face to face, and there shall
wait on them
immortal youths with bowls and ewers and a cup of purest
wine (that will neither pain their heads nor take away
their reason);
with fruits of their own choice and flesh of fowls that
they relish. And theirs shall be the dark-eyed houris,
chaste as hidden
pearls: a guerdon for their deeds... We created the houris
and made them virgins, loving companions for those on
the right hand.
. ."
So basically heaven for Muslims consists
of your choice of food and drink and sex, with no negative
after effects.
Ibn
Warraq's
article describes Muslim commentators who go into even
more great detail about the sexual pleasures of heaven,
seemingly
written
exclusively from the male perspective.
I wrote previously
that asking questions like where heaven is located and how it
is related to life on
Earth can
make belief
complicated because of the scientific problems it
creates. First off, how come we cannot detect heaven's existence
although we
are now able to probe the far reaches of the universe?
Is heaven in some parallel universe, with impenetrable
barriers?
But
they cannot be totally impenetrable since people
can
get there from
here. Since most people believe that people in heaven
can see and hear us as we go about on Earth, that
means that
light
and sound waves can travel from Earth to heaven,
crossing the barrier.
So must it be a one-way barrier? How would such a
barrier work to prevent two-way transmission? (This is again
the kind of
question a physicist would ask, because I have trouble
accepting that
the laws of physics don't apply in heaven.)
But another
problem is: what is it about heaven that is supposed to make
it so attractive? Most people,
even if
they have
no explicit model to work from, envisage eternal
life in heaven
as where
everything is very pleasant and discouraging words
are never heard. But surely if everything is perfect,
and
people in
heaven live forever experiencing neither pain nor
sorrow, it also
has to be dull?
And that is the key problem. I cannot
conceive of any way of conceptualizing heaven that is not
also
mind-numbingly
boring.
The only way to overcome that is to think that
our personalities in heaven also change so that
we never
get tired of unchanging
perfection. ("Wow, this grape is delicious!
Wow, so is the next one! And the next one!...")
But then people become boring.
For example, suppose
you are an avid golfer and your vision of heaven
is where you can play everyday
in
perfect weather.
Does
being in heaven mean that you hit perfect shots
each time? But if you do and your opponent
does too, wouldn't
that
take the
fun out of the game? Golf is trivial, but I
cannot think of anything at all that would not get tedious
very quickly
if
one was assured
of constant success. Pleasure in life goes
along with failure. Take away failure and pain and
loss and I
am not sure what
pleasure means.
The only thing that I personally
can see that is good about immortality is that I may learn
the
answers to
some difficult
and unanswered
questions that may elude me in my lifetime:
Is quantum mechanics the ultimate theory
or is there
a deeper
underlying theory?
What exactly happens when the quantum wave
function collapses in its
interaction with the observer? How can one
unambiguously draw the quantum/classical
system boundary? How
does the brain produce
consciousness and the appearance of free
will? Why do so many people find Julia Roberts attractive?
So basically,
my own idea of heaven is to have the equivalent of unlimited
high-speed internet
access
and subscriptions
to science journals. But even that would
be boring if I had to
wait around a long time for Earth-bound
scientists to find (if they
ever do) the answers to those questions.
On the other hand, if people in heaven
already know
the answers
to these questions
and told me as soon as I got there (not
that there's much chance of that), then there
would
be nothing
to look forward
to.
I can think of many, many things
that would be wonderful to experience for a very short
time
but all of them
would bore
me totally if
they went on indefinitely. It reminds
me of the time, soon after high school in
Sri Lanka,
when
I had a
temporary job working
in a chocolate factory. I was told that
we could eat all
the chocolates we wanted and since I
loved chocolate, this sounded
like heaven, and everyone envied me.
But after a week of eating chocolate, I was
sick of it.
I am becoming convinced
that we have pleasure on Earth precisely because it is unpredictable
and transient, it is mixed with pain
and failure, and we know that everything, including our lives, will
eventually come to an end. We experience happiness and pleasure at
moments in time, but for those moments to occur they must be preceded
by periods of anticipation, disappointment, and failures. Take those
things away and there is no pleasure either
It amazes me that
I never asked any of these questions or thought of any of these
things
until now. Even during the many years I was
religious, I never questioned then what form eternal life would
take and whether it is such an unequivocal Good Thing after all.
This
is surprising because I was always curious about other things and
trying to make connections.
Is there something
in the way we are taught our religious beliefs that gently steers
us away from these
questions because they are
so problematic? Why had I never probed deeply into what heaven
might be like?
In the next article,
I will look at what research in cognitive science says about why
we don't ask questions or look
for answers
to certain
questions, even when it might seem obvious that we should do
so.
Top of page
|