Customer Reviews

Zen Physics: The Science of Death, the Logic of Reincarnation

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

In this exciting book David Darling makes a number of startling observations, most notably that it is our ego-sense or our "consciousness" that makes us afraid of death. On page 104 Darling writes, "the prime biological function of the self is to be afraid of death." This is an ancient idea straight from the Upanishads, incorporated in the Bhagavad Gita and found in Buddhism as well as in yogic theory and practice. It is also an important idea in evolutionary psychology where consciousness or the sense of the individual self is just a trick of the species mechanism to make us fear death (among other things).

Unlike the scientific purveyors of evolutionary psychology, Darling sees us surviving death in another consciousness, although he assures us we will not be aware of our previous consciousness(es). He sees consciousness as something we all share with my consciousness being no different than yours, and in fact, it is the same thing and so can easily be taken up. We are "reincarnated" in this special sense. Darling says, on p. 180, "It is not a case of you becoming one person and me becoming someone else in the traditional sense of transmigrating souls. We have to see that `being you' is just a general phenomenon. There is no actual, objective link that determines who you will become. You will not become anyone. There is just a continuously experienced condition of you-ness." In yoga this is maya, the veil of illusion that continuously shrouds our perception.

Another nice quote is on page 176: "What the brain really does is to sample extremely narrow aspects of reality through the senses and then subject these to further drastic and highly selective reinterpretation." (See Norretranders's The User Illusion (1991) for a similar expression.) Darling's point is that the brain, as William James said in his famous quote about "the doors of perception," restricts our ability to see the world objectively. We see the world only as our system needs to see it to survive. Or, to quote Darling, (p. 180) "The brain effectively pinches off a little bubble of introverted awareness and stores and manipulates information relevant exclusively to the survival needs of the individual so created." Our sense of ourselves as individuals is, as the yogis teach, a delusion fostered on us by the evolutionary mechanism to help us cope with living on this animal plane.

Here's another idea that relates to the subjectivity of our view: If a spaceship should fall into the sun, we would see it as "burning up." To another consciousness, it might be seen as getting "tremendously excited" or "wonderfully transformed" or to a third consciousness, even "securing a place in the sun" so that it might be launched into space when the sun explodes, reproducing and spreading out. The whole point is, our bias and our expectations create our view of what is happening-indeed our expectations create our universe.

Some years ago I was excited with the idea that my consciousness is eternal, that my ideas will never die even after the universe has grown cold, nor will the unique organization of my brain cells and the pattern of their connections ever die, since it is the information they contain that is really "alive." Theoretically, I could be reconstructed and return, perhaps in a hundred billion years. Of course, that suggests the question, would I want to? and begs the observation, So what? since it is natural to feel that my "consciousness" (a kind of ghost in the machine) would not survive the reconstruction.

Darling contends (p. 175) that "consciousness can never be divorced from matter" (and vice-versa) and that the universe and everything in it has both "an objective and a subjective nature." He adds, "`Things' have no reality independent of their location in experience; they require the intimate involvement of mind to be given substance."

If we only experience consciousness when "alive," we could be dead for billions of years and alive for a few decades, on and off alternately, and we would only be aware of being alive. Sound familiar? In this sense we are immortal.

Although all this seems to be just playing with words and offering no solace to those in the thrall of the fear of death, it is not so. Regard the Gita, where it is written, we do not die. Our deaths, like our births and like our sense of self are very powerful illusions that only understanding can dispel. Darling's book is a very readable effort in that direction.

I was browsing through a local used book store and found myself face to face with this gem of a book. I read the sleeve and felt stongly enough to buy it on the spot, not knowing at the time that it would very well be the best, most well written book I had come across in years. Darling has aquired a profound insight into the process of death and the many misconceptions we have about it. He systematically walks you through the scientific process of death as well as other scientific phenomenon and lets you see for yourself that there isn't a huge mystery behind it all. Darling doesn't give you the answer to "the great question", but points you in the correct direction with style. I'm sorry to see that it is currently out of print. I highly recommend to anyone reading to search for this treasure!

I bought this book a couple of years ago while on a business trip, only to read it this year. I found it carefully lays out the scientific basis of death, and the loss of consciousness which results. It then proceeds to apply a Zen perspective in a clear and careful manner. I came on-line to buy it for a friend, and I am sad to learn it is out of print. I value my copy all the more. I am very lucky to have found it, and would recommend it to anyone.

I find myself agreeing in large part with James Luscombe's review -- the book doesn't deliver on what it's promised. This may be Darling's fault, or his publisher's, but the fact is: we don't have anything close to the promised ruminations on "the science of death, the logic of reincarnation" here. Darling does survey many of the more interesting questions in the domain of philosophy of mind, but if that's what you're looking for, I'd recommend Daniel Dennett instead.

Even when Darling does get close to discussing death and reincarnation, his arguments are unsatisfying. At least, to me. In essence, he says that our state of being prior to birth is analagous to that after death, and therefore we shouldn't fear returning to that state. Well, this is small consolation to me! I find myself remembering what Vladimir Nabokov wrote: "The cradle rocks above an abyss, and common sense tells us that our existence is but a brief crack of light between two eternities of darkness. Although the two are identical twins, man, as a rule, views the prenatal abyss with more calm than the one he is heading for (at some forty-five hundred heartbeats an hour)."

The book raises some interesting questions, but fails to come together as any sort of cohesive (to say nothing of definitive) work on the stated subject.

Darling uses logic to explain how quantum physics may be bound with personality, but never pretends that Zen can be explained rationally. This collection of thoughts is extremely well-organized and well-written.

The reviewer from Boston may have misunderstood this to be a pure science text, so I can see why he may have been disappointed. If the Uncertainty Principal resonates with you on a spiritual level, then read this book (all of it). I found the ideas fascinating, the logic compelling, and the implications mind-boggling.

I came on-line to buy this for a friend, and am sorry to see it out-of-print.

I am impressed with this book since it attempts to find a soul for the Universe and at same time not deny the brain directs personhood.
The question I have is ,if we are person destroyed ,( memories burned to dust) with the death of the brain, what in heavans name is experience, love, relationships and higher level human consciousness all about? It seems rather odd if there be a God or a Universal consciousness as Darling tries to prove throughout the book, that it could be absolutely without memory, purpose, direction, ability to integrate past,present, future.
How from a tabula rasa containing nothing spon creation of something? If this Universal mind has no intellect and no will and no memory of anything from where did everything in our World come from. Its like saying here is this "HOLY" cow without a memory, creates purposeless cow-flops which die and return to dust. The cow has no memory of their creation or their experience. The cow God just drops them off and lets enthropy take over, until they turn to dust.

I think and sense there is more to the story of reality than Darling has proposed, but I did enjoy his attempts to link quantum mysteries with mind and Zen philosophy.
I also think in certain places Darling draws conclusions about the mind from too biased and materialist grand stand.
For example, Sperry's split brain experiemnts are intriguing, but the idea of a single mind receiving input from two senory or computer hubs, the left and right brain cannot be ruled out.
If I receive two or more radio signals at once I too might behave as the split brain person ( one mind, trying to integrate different signals) What if one station tells me the cat is dead and the other the cat is alive. I might well in one moment say its dead and the other its alive. If God is intellectless, mindless and memory less (HE/SHE)
can be no better than a vast empty vessel. Why or how would such a vessel ever generate a World as full of personhood and experience as this?

David Darling's book explains quantum mechanics in a way anyone can understand. He also presents an intelligent thesis on the nature of life after death. His answer may not be what we wish to hear, but it makes sense. I've read this book twice now and wish it were back in print so that I could purchase my own copy.

I just finished reading this book, and I was sorely disappointed. The book is actually a very interesting, thought-provoking read until page 115, the end of Part I. After that (Part II), it splinters into a disconnected set of essays. The book is neither about Zen nor Physics, although both are cursorily mentioned in Part II. The subtitle of the book - The Science of Death, the Logic of Reincarnation - is simply false advertising. Part I of the book (You and Other Stories) is a well-written exposition of our ideas of ourselves, our brains and our memories, drawing upon current research in brain science. Part I is well worth reading. I kept waiting for the author to "close the loop" with the stated goals of the book. It never happened. Part II of the book feels rushed and disconnected, incoherent compared with Part I. Another criticism of the book is the lack of references. The author cites many interesting works and quotes - it would not be difficult to provide references. The author can be a good writer, poetic even, but you get the impression he is often recycling paragraphs, all largely saying the same thing.

Kind of heavy on phenomena such as near death experiences and brain physiology and light on Zen and Physics. Still, a very readable book, given complicated concepts discussed and certainly interesting. The author makes a good case for reincarnation without heavy religious overtones. Worth reading.

I found this work to be extremely well written, concise and logical. The author guides you to his conclusion with extensive research evidenced by his thorough bibliography. This book stayed with me for days after finishing it and was the subject of many dinner discussions with my wife. I felt like someone had finally pulled together all of the compoments that surround physics and Zen into a laypersons explanation that makes profound sense. I look forward to discussing this book with the many friends I will give it to.