Something ananda said made me think of this. We haven't had a poll question in forever... I guess this one is sufficiently huge.

For bonus points of an entirely useless nature, if there's a heaven and hell, what do you think they're like?

I think heaven looks like the Getty Museum in L.A. I think hell is like the women's restroom at my office (it doesn't seem particularly ominous at first, but the stale bleak ugliness, the 1970s architecture, the shelves that don't work so your belongings roll off... it's like a Dante concoction).

I don't exactly believe there's a heaven, but I'm working on it. Even if there is a heaven, I believe there's no hell.

I read an interesting article in which some philosophers argued that there could be souls and an afterlife without a deity to create or guide it all.

For me, heaven would be infinite access to the secrets of the universe; the joyful accumulation of knowledge. Hell I don't much think about, but I guess my idea is fairly Dante-an. Fire and pain and a little Greco-Roman irony just for giggles.

I'm very much an agnostic, though, bound to the scientific method, or at least an accumulation of evidence. My guy and I were talking about this the other night, actually. We were discussing the fact that faith doesn't make a lot of sense to me when it comes to things that I consider myths - believing in the Bible makes no more sense to me than believing in Mount Olympus or the creatures in Labyrinth (although David Bowie is clearly god). However, there are plenty of things I accept on faith, mostly regarding human relationships. For instance, I believe that my boyfriend loves me and isn't playing an elaborate practical joke on me. However, I think the abundance of evidence, both specific and general, points to his loving me as being much more likely than the other possibilities. Specific religions (although not a higher power in general), all seem highly unlikely to me, and not supported so much as they are in direct opposition to most of what the world tells us. I had never really considered my own point of view in this way before (in terms of the majority of evidence, rather than provable vs unprovable), and it felt, ironically, a little like a revelation.

So heaven is Internet 3.0?

I admit I tend that way too. I think heaven (or my heaven) would have access to every channel, TV show, book, movie ever made or yet to be made, and the answer to every question, and maybe the chance to go back in time and experience various periods of history. Also there would be a strong food element.

I have to believe I'm something of a typical agnostic. Scientific method and reason are far too conclusive to leave wiggle room.

Even if there is a deity who exists within or even beyond the current physical universe a we understand (or could understand) it, I'm afraid I just can't accept any notion of an afterlife. As comforting as it is, as wistful as I may view the potential to find satisfaction and peace, it can't be. Not in a meaningful way. I've reached that conclusion by two separate routes.

The first is the dilemma of compatibility. My heaven would necessitate the presence of other individuals. My happiness could never be a solitary one, but including other psyches in my heaven limits the expressions of my true happiness. I think Descartes wrote an essay regarding this, or maybe it was one of those Matrix thesis from a while back. Either way, either heaven is a facsimile of reality created to please me or my happiness is limited to allow genuine interaction- either way it's not truly Heaven, Heaven. (thereby eliminating the notion as plausible in my mind. If there's an afterlife, how could it be imperfect. That's what this world is)

The other route is biological. The Me that is, the identity and essence of my being is locked in the biological material within my head. This is fact, in the way I take all other scientific truths to be fact. That my experiences, memories and identity are locked into the framework of my mind is unshakable in my mind. Therefore, even if a soul could be proved to exist, or even if it does but is never demonstrated, then those memories, experiences and identity don't survive the death of the body. The soul would be an animating spirit that was devoid of my identity, so that if it traveled to an afterlife, I wouldn't travel with it. Like a processor from one computer doesn't contain the data, so it can be moved from one motherboard to the next with no crossover of information.

It saddens me a little, to feel so certain. Like I'm taking away something from myself. And yet, I can't help but feel bolstered at the courage it takes to view death as final. It makes it all so much more poignant, so very much more vital to see life as a singular and precious event in the universe. Like making the most of nihilism, if nothing we do matters, than all that matters is what we do. (Heh, I'm proud I managed to shoe horn that in)

Very interesting. But you're discounting that the same rule might apply which we generally apply to gods: that of a substance in which all things are possible. Therefore heaven could be a place where your fulfillment was unlimited and simultaneously compatible with the limitless happiness of everyone else. I'm a little afraid to speculate as to what it is you'd like to be doing up there that other people would spoil...

I've been toying also with the question of whether, if you were to go to heaven, you yourself would be altered and perfected. So would you be your regular self, which would be comfortable and familiar and human, or would you be better, happier, wiser, more essentially you... prettier, taller, more coordinated, more loved... able to dance flamenco and speak every language... ? The possibilities are endless.

I'm an atheist, but trying not to be one, as I've realized that the human lifetime is a foxhole.

Hmm, I'm not nearly the philosopher that (Descartes/Wychoski/whoever) was so I'm really not the best person to expand on the thesis. Suffice it to say it isn't that any particular person disagrees with any specific behavior or event, it's that the collection of people with independent thought and will inevitably results in conflicts of interest. Just as an example, a widower who remarries is now reunited with both wives? Polygamy in Heaven? Are we reconciled to all our past failures and divisions? Either who we are is altered such that we're no longer who we were or Heaven must conform to our expectations and therefore present idyllic and artificial personalities to create those reconciliations we require to be fulfilled.

I've always liked the Nordic description of a human life as a mead hall during a fierce storm. A bird flying from the storm through the safety, order and warmth of the mead hall would be as bewildered and ill-equipped as the average person, only to be swallowed up by the storm again as it passed through the rear door. Bleak, but a powerful imagery.

Or do you mean foxhole as in "there's no atheists in a foxhole"? Because I've always been tickled by John Lennon's adopted atheism abandoning him completely as he lay dying. (and Christ, that sentence didn't come out right) More specifically, it's easy to be intellectual and casual with faith when you're secure and happy. Less so when there's nothing left to hold onto.

Really? What did Lennon say?


You're ascribing the completely human and physical limitations of time and space to a completely spiritual realm where none of those laws exist. I'm not criticizing you here- we're humans. We're bound by certain laws and we don't really have the capability of imagining something that exists beyond the bounds of what we know and understand. I imagine that's why Jewish sages say, "Yes, there's an afterlife. Don't think too much about it." I see this same issue in its extreme form come up sometimes with certain smug atheist types (not anyone here, obviously) who made inane cracks about Joan of Arcadia like, "Turn on the news and see what G-d is not taking care of while he's busy talking to Joan" prompting me to want to smack them in the face repeatedly whilst saying with every slap, "You. Are. A. Dolt."


Makes tons of sense. Amazingly, I feel exactly the same way but come to the opposite conclusion. Heh. That is to say, all the evidence to me- both the Big Things and the little things- repeatedly point to "there is a G-d." This knowledge is not absolute, but then, *no* knowledge is absolute. We take a tremendous amount on what we call "faith" every day and it's generally based on patterns and what we already know and have experienced. We make educated guesses. We *figure* things will go this way. We don't really know, because we can't ever really know anything 100% but we still call it knowledge.

(Note: the following is all my personal idea of the afterlife based on what I've learned from Judaism, but there is no absolute consensus on any of it in Judaism because, again, it's not something we're supposed to focus on and also no one's ever come back to tell us for sure.)

eej, it may make you happy to know that I do believe that Heaven is in a way absolute knowledge and understanding. And in a way, so is Hell. They're sort of two sides of the same coin. Judaism does not believe in the Christian idea of Hell- ie. if your sins outweigh your good deeds you go to a place of all fire and brimstone and demons with horns whipping you for the rest of eternity. Our Hell is more like purgatory- everyone (except the rare few who repent completely before they die) goes there first and it's where you are held accountable for all the bad deeds you did by being brought face to face with them. Now that you are no longer bound by your physical body, you're able to see everything with perfect clarity- the fog of your human needs and wants are not there to cloud your judgment so there is no self-denial, no justifications, no blame, no "but, but!" It's just you and a video of "This is your life" where you are faced with everything you did in your life- every person you hurt whether intentionally or with offhand cruelty; the damage you did to yourself, other people, and the world; the consequences of your actions and the staggering ramifications they had. (Again, unless you truly repented for them.) I know that the worst feelings I have ever had have been the crushing weight of horror and remorse when I realized, truly realized, how I had hurt someone. That, to me, is Hell. It's sort of a cleansing period. Before anyone can go to Heaven, they need to first deal with the bad things they did and let them go before they can go one to reap the rewards of their good life, and tradition hold that no one is there for longer than a year.

And that sort of leads back to what I was saying before about being bound by our human limitations. As humans we can't ever have full knowledge and comprehension, but after death we're with G-d- who is beyond those laws. We can finally grasp the full scope of everything, because G-d *is* everything. Everything is contained within Him and we'll basically just be basking in it. We'll understand everything so entirely that the questions won't even make sense anymore. (I'm sorry to be doing all this G-d talk- I hope I'm not making anyone uncomfortable. This is how I see it as someone who obviously believes in G-d, but you can also leave out the G-d bits and figure it's just a place of absolute knowledge.) And of course, we'll be shown all the positive ramifications of all the good we did. Most people really do faaaaar more good than bad, which is why Hell is just a brief stopover- but every person is held accountable for all deeds done, good and bad. They don't cancel each other out. And yes, everyone goes, regardless of their religion or whether they even believe in G-d. What happens to the truly hideously monstrously evil- the Hitlers of the world- is a matter of some debate though.

Golly. I hope at least some of that made sense. (And didn't offend anybody.)

It all made sense, SNeak, and really is a comforting and just hope. My only problem with it is that, again, that kind of insight or metasight, so to speak, is a fundamental Change in who we are.

If that is the afterlife, then we aren't really us anymore. We're something different, greater, perhaps, something More than before, but different.

I'm not saying death isn't a transformative experience, but it feels to easy for me. To simple ascend by dint of dying. To become enfolded in absolute knowledge and therefore purge oneself of our failings and ascend to a higher state of consciousness simple by ceasing to exist... Why put it off?

I respect your belief, and actually envy it, but I just can't accept it. It doesn't jibe with how I understand existence. Well, how I perceive existence since Nobody really understands it.

I was referring to the proverbial atheists in a foxhole.

I've considered the multiple spouses/families problem, also. Say if I were reunited with every cat I've had... each of those was used to being an only cat.

Supposing there were conflict in heaven. It might be that some people need conflict to be happy and feel human.

I like the idea of nirvana, which feels similar to me to the idea of existing in/as absolute knowledge... but neither scenario is personified enough for me. I'm really attached to me as an individual, so don't want to give up so much me that I'm no longer me... but if it were maintaining the individual soul, but also dissolving some of the boundaries around the self so that you were united with others (the way being in love feels), that I could enjoy.



In the Christian belief, somebody came back. But he didn't have a whole lot to report on the subject. Or maybe he did; I've hardly read the book.

Interesting, I thought Jewish theology involved no afterlife at all. Which was why I had trouble getting it. Like, what's the use of having a god without an afterlife? Only the (in my opinion, marginal) comfort of knowing that you cease to be but it's all okay.

Also interesting about the purgatory-like state. Like a year spent in that feeling you get in the pit of your stomach when you know you've done something wrong.

I agree that most people are inherently good, and that those who act grossly otherwise are malfunctioning; that's why I believe there isn't and can't be a hell. Ditto that everyone would go. I don't hold with the "punishment" aspect of some religions, which has grown less popular in modern times.



I'd be sorry if that were the case. I like questions and the process of answering them, and I think they're part of the wisdom. I'd want to remember what I questioned and the answers — the journey, not just the destination.



We change (hopefully for the better) during our lives, though, and we're still us after we change.



To me, it's more about whether death is a reality in your life or an abstract. If I looked at it one way, I would say that religion (like ghosts) was invented out of the human inability to reconcile the irreconcilable: e.g., this person no longer exists, but he has to exist. Immovable object meets irresistible force.

Oh please know that I do not glory in death. I'm not like "Woo, that sounds fun, what am I waiting for?" Quite the opposite. One of the reasons we don't focus on the afterlife is because we're supposed to focus on the here and now. (Also because we're not supposed to do good for the sake of a reward.) Life is the most important stage of existence- it's sacred, beautiful. It's the only state in which action is possible and without it, everything would be meaningless. The body may limit us in certain ways, but it's also what makes us capable of *doing* things and feeling pleasure- physical, emotional, *and* spiritual. Those are all Very Good Things.



A very common misconception. It drives me crazy whenever I see a Jewish character on television espousing it. Somehow "We don't focus on it" got twisted into "We don't have it."

Well, that's probably what I believe in, in my randomly cobbled together, intellectually lacking mixture of Catholicism and paganism. An afterlife just doesn't seem very interesting to me; a humanised, bureaucratic god seems a bit silly (all that organisation - I think god just lets things be, or rather god IS things).

As for death, the words of one of my favourite songs sum it up for me: all of this and none of it.

Those lyrics took some work; opposite of those songs that repeat one refrain over and over again.

They seem to chronicle pretty much every vision of or role for death in human life. Who knew it was that pervasive? I particularly like "the granite memorials where memories wither in rows" — I think it is like that.

The one that haunts me is the "spiders all clinging together and crying".

I couldn't figure that one out. Is it supposed to be mourners dressed in black?

I really don't know. It's just creepy.

Charlotte's Web?

You know, it could be. Wasn't that movie contemporaneous with the other dated references?

You inspired me to find out and apparently it's from a poem by Robert Lowell:
"We are like a lot of wild
Spiders crying together
But without tears"