Showing posts with label death. Show all posts
Showing posts with label death. Show all posts

Thursday, April 11, 2024

The Art of Happiness and Life after Death


Arthur Dobrin has written a book titled:  The Lost Art of Happiness.  He, along with about 12 members of Ethical Culture from four Ethical Culture Societies, just completed a 10 week seminar, discussing the book.  We met for the last time this week--and the final discussion centered on death, dying, losing a loved one, and life after death.

Dobrin has a nice section in his last chapter that talks about the memories that we hold of those we've lost--and that others will hold of us when we are gone.  Not believing in heaven, hell, assorted deities, etc., we might still like to continue for a time in the hearts and minds of those we've touched on our journey.  While there was some discussion of this, there was more in the vein of not having so many connections in this life and feeling unsettled about what happens after life.  "Nothing" was not very satisfying.

I decided to keep my thoughts to myself.  My thoughts might have been even less satisfying to these, mostly, strangers to me, and I did not want to debate.  What came to my mind focused most intensely on funerals and that memory thing.

My experience with funerals falls mostly into the traditions of the Southern Baptist Church.  I've been to a lot of those, from quite an early age.  They have a pattern, which I don't need to recount, and they serve a need for the community.  Serving that need is where my thoughts went in that last seminar discussion.  I wanted to say that funerals don't do the deceased a damned bit of good.  Funerals are rituals that help those left behind adjust to their new status in life.  A husband dies, the wife is now a widow.  A mother dies, the child is now motherless.  Each new status will come with expectations for behavior--from the person whose status has changed and from others who must now shift their relationships to that person.  That's a fairly bald statement of a lot of years of anthropological research (not mine) that points to funerals (and other rituals related to life changes) as a means to assert community beliefs and maintain social organization in the face of change.

What we talked about in the seminar was making sure that we had planned ahead so that our family knows what our wishes are regarding our own funeral.  This will settle future family arguments about what to do--and give us some comfort about our dignity in those last hours above ground.  Well, yes, except that what I wanted to point out is that once you're dead, well, you're dead.  We all know that "you can't take it with you."  We all need to know that "you're not actually going to be present at your own funeral."  I wanted to say that funerals are for the living, not the dead.  What we should be wanting for our loved ones is whatever they need to get through the ordeal, if it is such, of separating from us.  What gives them comfort?  What gives them closure?

I write about this from some experience.  My husband's death was sudden, unexpected.  He had, however, frequently said that he did not want a funeral.  No fuss, no muss, just cremation.  He was also an organ donor.  I honored his wishes.  No funeral.  And I gave permission, at nearly midnight on the day he died, to the caller who let me know that they would be taking him away for a while to let him make one last contribution to others.  I didn't want to know the details, but, yes, he was a giving and caring man, and we both would want him to help someone else in their time of need--and certainly to increase our knowledge of medical science.  So, no funeral and a fragile body from which some parts had been removed--so that, once he had been removed from my late mother's home, I might never see him again.  It was a blow.  I had so much change to cope with at that point, and little support to cope with it.  

Still, I honored his wishes.  Except.  If he was to be cremated, I could not let his body just be tossed in a fire.  I ordered the special casket that is used for cremations and began the two-week wait for the one bay that could accommodate him at the crematorium to become available.  I also knew that his daughter would need to see him to say goodbye, so I arranged with the funeral home that we would have a "viewing" before he was taken to be cremated.  One request that I made was that his casket be covered with a flag.  Even though his "service" was in the Army Reserves, I thought his dedication and service-to-country extended well beyond that brief period of time.  The funeral home was helpful in placing a flag (a loaner) over his casket--and I was comforted by that chance to honor my husband.  Other than that, I had only a moment to talk to him, to tell him that I . . . well, I was cut off mid-sentence as the funeral home representative said that my step-daughter, her mother, and her step-sister had arrived.  And then the discussion turned on their comfort and solace.  A few days later, when I went to the crematorium, there was a moment, when the hearse left with his casket and I followed behind, when my grief overflowed.  This was the funeral cortege--a hearse and me, following behind.  It seemed both appropriate that there would be such a journey and so inadequate for the kind of man that he was.  At the crematorium, I stood at a window and looked at the bays where bodies were consumed in flames, all closed, of course.  I watched his casket enter that larger bay.  I held up as long as I could, but I know that someone came to stand by me and help me survive the closing of those doors.  

And that was it.  No magic words.  No ritual motions.  No comfort.  No closure.  No healing.  

Could I have found healing in words spoken by someone who did not know him?  Could I have had some closure with songs and flowers and family standing beside me?  I had left the church long ago.  I did not want, nor would he have wanted, bible verses and "when we all get to heaven."  Well, honestly, I do like the song.  I don't accept the meaning, but I love the joy and community in singing it.  But it would have meant nothing if sung at some service for my husband.  

His death remained a raw wound for years.  I wrote to him, as I had been doing before he died.  Years of emails exchanged while I took care of my mother in another city turned into long notes about my days, my thoughts, my concerns as I ended or began a day with "notes" written on my computer.  I joined a grief support group at a local hospice.  I eventually found community at the Ethical Society of Austin.  Every event meant to help someone else get through grief became a moment for me to seek some comfort for my own loss.

So what I wanted to say at that last meeting of the seminar is that your funeral is not about you.  You may be the center of your life today, but when you are dead, you are gone, not here, not aware.  Those you leave behind, however, are still living, still thinking and feeling.  It is not your ears that will hear the songs, not your eyes that will see the flowers.  Your mouth will not taste the food of your funeral feast.  The question is not what you want people to do to send you on to your grave (which is pretty much the end of the road for you) but how badly you want them to get on with their lives, grateful to have had some time with you, but prepared to continue living and breathing a little while longer.

Honestly, I don't know what could have helped me get through these past 10 years any more easily than I have, but I do think I needed a chance to say goodbye.  A chance to speak privately with my husband, to talk to him one last time, to finish my sentence.  I was grateful to be able to give him the small honor of a flag.  I could barely see to drive in that last mile before reaching the crematorium, but I remember being grateful to have that particular ritual, wishing that others could have been there to honor him on that journey.  But there was never a goodbye.  I think now that I should not have honored his wishes, because I really needed that goodbye.  Still do.

Saturday, June 18, 2016

Things that need to be said

After Orlando, there are few things that need to be said.


About the LGBT community.  The massacre at Pulse in Orlando was a hate crime.  It came as a shock to the LBGT community, which includes not only those who identify as LGBT, but also those who care about that community, whether because of family and friendship ties or because of their desire to live in an inclusive and ethical society.  The attempt to co-opt the grief and suffering that comes out of such an evil act for political purposes is despicable.  So, too, are the false flag condolences from those who helped create a climate of hate against the LGBT community. Thoughts, prayers, moments of silence are, at best, disingenuous from those who, in the days before Orlando sought to deprive the LGBT community of its civil rights and protections in this life while condemning them to horrors in the afterlife.

About gun violence.  
  • Guns kill people.  
  • Assault weapons are called that for a reason.  
  • On the day of the Orlando murders, an additional 38 Americans lost their lives to gun violence and 8 more were wounded.  So far in 2016, there have been 24,087 "incidents" of gun violence which led to a total of 6,186 deaths and 12,616 injuries.  
  • Here's a look at 330 mass shootings in 2015:
I am ignoring the voiceover at the end.  This isn't about politics.  It is about thinking that there is one "gun problem," one "solution," that the problem is only guns.  We need to broaden our thinking to look at all the issues with who has guns and why, not just the kinds of guns they have.

About extreme Islamic terrorism.  Is there a difference between the terrorism of one religious group over another?  Is there a difference between extreme terrorism and ordinary terrorism?  Did the men and women in the Pulse suffer more than the men and women of Emmanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church?  Was their suffering less or more than the victims and survivors of the Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood shooting?  These were all acts of terrorism.  I am not intending to downplay one event to highlight another.  I am not denying the role that Islam seems to have played in the Orlando shooter's motives--or justifications.  I am not in any way meaning to be flippant or casual about the terrible crimes that have been committed.

I am, however, interested in the concept of terrorism as a tool to influence behaviors and attitudes, as a weapon of war.  The goal of terrorism is not just to kill or maim; it is first and foremost intended to create terror.  To instill a fear in those who survive, who witness, who somehow become aware of the event--and its justification--so that they become wary of doing anything that might bring such a horror down on their own heads.  LGBT men and women would then stop being who they are--or at least acting openly in any manner that might seem authentic to their identities.  Rather they will go back in the closet, stop demanding outrageous "rights," straighten up.  Black people cannot change the color of their skin, but they can certainly stop making such a nuisance of themselves, again demanding outrageous "rights."  They need to "know their place" and stay there.  Women must stop seeking to gain control of their own bodies and lives, become once more subservient to men, and take up their proper roles as baby makers and sex objects.  No more "women's rights" nonsense.

We have heard the response from the LGBT community:  "In hope and defiance, we dance."  We see from Mother Emmanuel Church days of commemoration and positive action with the reminder: "Let all that you do be done in love."  From Planned Parenthood--well, they're still busy fighting all those politicians to keep the doors open.  I'll just say for them:  "Oh, hell, no!"  

And leave it there for now.  There's more.  I missed my self-imposed deadline for a post this week, but I have certainly been puzzling my way through recent events.  Yes, there'll be more.

Thursday, February 18, 2016

Gloating over Scalia

Justice Antonin Scalia is dead.  I missed the news.  It apparently happened a few days ago.  I am sometimes isolated from current issues when I have some thinking to do--no TV, no newspaper, not internet news feed for the duration.  So I don't know the circumstances, just that it was sudden and unexpected (to most people?).*  I found out about his death by reading a political blog that I often visit--although not in the past several days.  At this point, news posts are dealing with the political circus that has erupted over Scalia's replacement on the Supreme Court of the United States.  The comments discuss the Republican strategy, the Democrat strategy, the quality of the headline of whatever article is being discussed (a constant debate).

Some commenters, however, note that they took the news of Justice Scalia's death as an opportunity to celebrate.  Then followed some snarky remarks about houses falling on Scalia, as if he were a "wicked witch."  And so on.

I can't say that I thought of Justice Scalia with any admiration while he was alive, nor do I think his legacy will make our nation a better one.   Indeed, I was quite convinced that his every action on the Supreme Court was to weaken the nation, ignore the constitution, and generally destroy the fabric of civil society.  I had read, however, that he was nice enough in person, had a good sense of humor.  I forced myself to listen to him speak a couple of times and was pretty much surprised that he made some sense.

I don't believe that his "spirit" lives on.  His conscious awareness of self--his soul, if you will--died when he drew his last breath and the electrical connections in his brain stopped.  I am not afraid that his ghost will haunt me if I "speak ill of the dead."  Why then am I bothered by the celebration and snark that others have evinced?  Am I exhibiting some sort of false piety when I think that there should be at least a moment when we acknowledge that a human life--any human life--has ended?

Death is a big deal.  It's the end of a life.  Whatever a person did in life is over. His/her works may continue after death, but there will never be anything new from him/her, never be any explanation for the past, never be any chance to change or make amends or make peace.  It's just over.  Done.  Finished.  Do we not need to pause in our own busy lives to take into account this change that has happened--this new void in our world?  Do we not owe it to ourselves to preserve our own humanity by acknowledging the immensity of death, the significance of a human life and death?  Even some animals grieve for the loss another.

When we call each other pejorative names, we objectify and generally discount each other's human worth.  When we gloat at the death of an enemy/opponent/other, we deny both their humanity and our own.  To take pleasure in death, frankly, makes us one with any common killer.

Yes, there's a vacancy on the US Supreme Court.  I can see that as a good thing for some progressive and humanist issues, since the vacancy was held by an extremely conservative justice.  Yes, there will be a scramble to fill the vacancy, and we can all pop some corn to enjoy the show.  We may even decide that our vote in the coming primary will make a difference in how the show ends and get involved in it in our own small way.  Life and politics go on.  Let them go on with some recognition of our common humanity, our common mortality, our common need to--somehow--live together.

*Just hoping his family had some time to prepare.  Sudden death of a loved one can be quite traumatic.