Survival after physical death
My book, Reality Check: Science Meets Religion,
contains evidence that the mind is the seat of our consciousness and that
this is quite separate from the brain, is non-physical, and therefore
survives death of the physical body. Chapter 2 contains a brief description
concerning this that an eminent doctor described to the Royal Medical
Society in Edinburgh in 1937. For the purpose of keeping my book simple,
I abridged his description to remove the confusion deriving from some
of the medical details and the rather confusing 'A' and 'B' consciousness
references therein. As promised in my book, however, a more detailed account
is presented here.
I also include an extract from my book about a Doctor George Rodonaia,
whose near-death experience is very solid proof of consciousness existing
outside the confines of the physical body: because the details of it are,
in effect, verified by two other doctors.
My book includes much more independently supported evidence that consciousness
is separate to body. The reason why I go into all this is to prove that
consciousness of human beings—just like the consciousness of God—lies
beyond the confines of space-time. This is an important factor in understanding
the true nature of creation and how we could survive in another space-time
environment we call Heaven after our physical death.
Lord Geddes near-death experience
Lord Geddes was a physician and a professor of anatomy, and that is why
his account is so significant. He, above all, was much better able to
understand what was happening to him when his consciousness temporarily
parted from his physical body. Here is his account, but if you find it
a little confusing, rest assured that my book makes things very much easier
'On Saturday, November 9th, a few minutes after midnight, I began to
feel very ill and by 2 o'clock I had developed all the symptoms of very
acute poisoning... pulse and respiration being quite impossible to count...
I realised I was very ill and very quickly reviewed my whole financial
position: therefore at no time did my consciousness appear to me to be
in any way dimmed, but I suddenly realised my consciousness was
separating from another consciousness which was also me. These, for the
purposes of description, we could call the A and B consciousnesses, and
throughout what follows, the ego attached itself to the A consciousness.
The B personality I recognised as belonging to the body [remember 'B'
for 'Body' to minimise confusion in what follows], and my physical condition
'I realised that [it] was beginning to show signs of being composite...
These components became more individual and the B consciousness began
to disintegrate, while the A consciousness, which was now me, seemed to
be altogether outside my body, which it could see. Gradually I realised
that I could see not only my body and the bed in which it was, but everything
in the whole house and garden, and then I realised that I was not only
seeing 'things' at home, but in London and in Scotland, in fact wherever
my attention was directed it seemed to me; and the explanation I received,
from what source I do not know, but which I found myself calling my mentor,
was that I was free in a time dimension of space, wherein 'now' was in
some way equivalent to 'here' in the ordinary three dimensional space
of everyday life.
'I next realised that my vision included not only 'things' in the ordinary
three dimensional world, but also 'things' in these four and more dimensional
places that I was in. From now on the description is—and must be—entirely
metaphorical because there are no words which really describe what I saw,
or rather appreciated. Although I had no body I had what appeared to be
perfect two-eyed vision, and what I saw can only be described in this
way, that I was conscious of a psychic stream flowing with life through
time, and this gave the impression of being visible, and it seemed to
me to have a particularly intense iridescence.
'I understood from my mentor that all our brains are just end-organs
projecting as it were from the three dimensional universe into the psychic
stream and flowing with it into the fourth and fifth dimensions. Around
each brain, as I saw it, there seemed to be what I can only describe in
ordinary words as a condensation of the psychic stream.'
This is the most important part of his long description, which finishes...
'It is surprising to note that this dream, vision or experience has shown
no tendency to fade like a dream would fade, nor has it shown any tendency
that I am aware to grow or rationalise itself as a dream would do. I think
the whole thing simply means that but for the medical treatment of a peculiarly
prompt and vigorous kind, I was dead to the three dimensional universe.
If this is so, and if in fact the experience of liberation of consciousness
in the fourth dimensional universe is not imagination, it is a most important
matter to place on record.'
The fact he did this shows just how important he considered this to be,
for he most certainly would have anticipated ridicule from his medical
colleagues. At the time he did protect himself somewhat by saying he was
withholding the name of the experient for professional reasons, but it
is now widely believed to have been himself. All the medical details suggests
this could not have come from an ordinary patient.
In my book, Reality Check: Science Meets Religion,
I compare Lord Geddes' experience with one of cosmic consciousness described
in the autobiography of Paramahansa Yogananda, for there are similar aspects.
Yogananda was extraordinary person too because, after death, his body
remained totally incorrupt. This state of perfect preservation of a body
was, so far as the mortuary knew from mortuary annals, an unparalleled
one. (More details are given in my book.) [Note, some sources, including
my early copy of UK printed version of Yogananda's book, used the following
incorrect spelling of his first name: 'Paramhansa', which I used in the
eBook. I take this opportunity to correct it to 'Paramahansa'.]
Dr. George Rodonaia's near-death experience
This case is detailed in Dr. Raymond Moody’s documentary film called
after Life—also see his book of the same title—and in
Dr. Melvin Morse’s book called Transformed by the Light.
George came back to life when his ‘dead’ body was moved
from a cabinet to a gurney prior to an autopsy being carried out. The
conducting doctor became suspicious when George’s eyes responded
to light. George was immediately rushed to intensive care and resuscitated.
Afterwards, George told his family about his experiences while classified
as ‘dead’. Apparently he visited them at home and saw his
grieving wife and two small sons. He explained how he also visited their
neighbours whose recently born baby kept crying; doctors had been unable
to determine why. Amazingly, during this out-of-body experience, George
was able to communicate with the baby by some form of telepathy, and the
baby informed him his arm hurt. George was then able to see the baby’s
bone was twisted and broken and knew he had a greenstick fracture of his
As a result of him subsequently telling the baby’s parents about
this, they took their child to a doctor who X-rayed the arm and confirmed
George’s out-of-body diagnosis. Clearly George’s consciousness
was somewhere other than in his brain during this period—whether
brain-dead or not.
I don’t think doctors would jeopardize their credibility by recounting
such things unless they did actually happen and they felt really strongly
that people should know about them, do you? Three doctors were involved
in this [more].
Click here to find out how to buy my book.
Back to top
Click here for BUY options
"'Reality Check' is an interesting and accessible book... that sets up the basic argument well, an intriguing one at that: proof of God in brain and mind being two different things, mind existing beyond the time-space continuum. At this stage my interest was piqued. I haven’t come across an argument like this before so it appears original... I was entertained and informed along the way and feel richer for the debate. Anyone interested in these themes would do well to have a read of 'Reality Check'." (Ross Clark - Authonomy)
"This is one hell of a book, excuse the pun; and so well researched, and the thoughts are radical on this matter... [the] Albert Einstein line, very relevant to-day and very much relates to what you have written... I was totally intrigued... and found it to be very informative." (Tom Bye - Authonomy)
"The most abstract of concepts are communicated in a clearly digestible form… There is a tremendous need for the genre represented here: arguments which transcend the physical world. For many, if not most, the task of adequately preparing oneself to respond to such questions is simply too daunting. I appreciate the scholarly professionalism and the extensive referencing… [The author] rises to the challenge of what most would consider an extremely difficult calling." (James Revoir - Authonomy)
"This is a very intriguing piece. I believe there is a significant demand for such discussions... I especially appreciate the inviting style, which will definitely be a plus for more skeptical readers." (Faith Rose - Authonomy)
"The survey of arguments both for and against the existence of God provides the reader with a way to better compare and contrast different viewpoints… Presenting the strengths and weaknesses of all of these different viewpoints was one of the things I liked most. I was really interested to read these chapters because, as a mathematician and a Christian, while there may be perceived conflicts between science and religion, I believe there are no conflicts between the structures and systems of the universe and God. This book also explains things very well… [and is] accessible without sacrificing scientific integrity… I think the book will be enjoyed by many and will encourage lively discussion." (David Bortress - Authonomy)
"Extremely well written, researched and set out. Every point is very clear. The analogies are extremely imaginative and very effective. The passion in this work is powerful and every paragraph is thought provoking. The arguments are well thought through and persuasive... I would suggest that everyone reads it and think very carefully about what you say." (Gareth Naylor - Authonomy)