[image: explorespiritism.com]

A Theory of Enlightenment

I do not envy a sincere preacher, priest ,or rabbi who must deliver a sermon each week in which he attempts to impart words of wisdom to his or her congregation. The chances are good that his level of personal enlightenment is no better than are his listeners. A teacher of academic subjects generally does not have the same problem. Students almost by definition lack knowledge about a given subject; hence expectation levels are different on the part of students and teachers. Not so with clerics and congregations. Both are in the dark. Moreover, if the cleric tries to fake enlightenment, his insincerity becomes apparent and his credibility falls.

The underlying issues are myriad: How does anyone achieve “superior” knowledge and wisdom on the subjects of life’s purpose; or death; an afterlife; whether God exists; what is truly good or evil in this world; and how to know the differences between facts, fantasies, truth, and a whole lot of baloney surrounding these subjects?

Nearly all clerics can say that they are not the source of their insights, and that they are merely the messengers, speaking for the Creator. And they can point to the Bible, the Koran, the Torah or other books as their source as well as the rituals and history of their church as having special enlightenment channels. The problem with these approaches is that different messengers have very different messages, and different source documents have differing bits of information and they are subject to many different interpretations. Moreover, assertions about truth in the absence of verifiable evidence simply lack credibility. Any discerning congregationist knows about these limitations and the inherent contradictions. The more enlightened ones get up and head for the exits, while the believers stay seated only to be given more servings of misinformation.

You and I, however, can discuss these issues on level terms, more or less using the Socratic Method and the rules of logic. We know that Socrates was not the way, the Truth, and the Light. And logic also has its limitations. But I think we can agree that Socrates was a very wise man, and the scientific method nearly always provides better answers than does any other method. In my readings about Socrates and science, neither has ever once served up a plate of sawdust pudding.

And so I have a theory of enlightenment for discussion. I am not the source of this theory. I read about it from many different sources that all tend to converge and build on the same themes, the same issues, and the same outcomes. The messages are subject to examination, to analysis, to synthesis, and to evaluation. There is no requirement to believe under penalty of damnation. The element of belief is still present, but mainly because when we depart from what is observable and verifiable, we sometimes must let our imaginations take over.

Here is a summary of what many of those sources convey to all of us. We are all here to gain in intellectual, moral, and spiritual enlightenment. We know when we are gaining in these areas by our behaviors. As we improve we act with more kindness, with more tolerance of others, with more humility, with more understanding, and with more forgiveness. Some persons are more enlightened than others. They are doctors, lawyers, farmers, teachers, carpenters, housewives, and clerics—to name but a few. They appear in both genders, at many different ages, from all colors and nationalities. No single group has an advantage over others—especially not the clerics. Role models are different among adherents, but they are similar to the traits mentioned.

Why and how are spirits different from each other? Some are probably older. Not necessarily older by their dates of births, rather by their number of incarnations. Yes, they did not assimilate all their good attributes in 25 or 50 years, but perhaps in 10,000 or 50,000 years. In one lifetime after another. By learning, living, doing, and not repeating old bad habits.

By this theory we do not all start each new life on Earth at the same level of enlightenment. Nor do we all have an equal probability of falling into a life of tyranny. I guess it’s not too soon to mention that life on Earth is but one place for an incarnation. There are literally millions of other habitable planets in the Universe. But that only lends credence to scientific thinking on this subject.

Between incarnations we all migrate to the same spirit world. It is where we can see farther, deeper, and where we live among others with equal levels of enlightenment. We learn about our errors in a most powerful and revealing way: We undergo a “life review” in the presence of highly enlightened spirits. Neither they nor God judge us, rather they help us understand the impact our behaviors had on others. Indeed, we will feel every emotion felt by others as a consequence of our actions. This review is so profound that we each come away from it with a completely new sense of humility and of our need to improve in all aspects of our beings.

After a suitable period of time in contemplation, plus attendances at the various spiritual assemblages, and in communication with our “family of spirits,” we return to Earth or elsewhere for another life to be lived in atonement for our errors, to achieve a specific objective, and to progress onward. It is a trek that all must take, with no exceptions, and with the same destination: To ultimately be assumed into the glory of God.

I will stop here lest someone think I am just another preacher who is out and about looking for new believers to usher into another religious faith. I am not. Nor do I have all the answers or all the questions about spiritism.

My sources are those who have been in contact with high level spirits, and the questions asked of them, as well as the answers given by the spirits. These conversations take place daily in many locations throughout the world. Those who attend and follow the teachings of spirits are generally called “spiritists” (not spiritualists). Spiritism is not a religion; it has no preachers, no songs to sing, nor communal prayers to recite; and most of the other elements found in religions.

The interested reader can Google “spiritism” or “spiritism websites,” or “Allen Kardec” (author of 4 or 5 books on this subject). One of his books contains 1,019 questions and answers that he asked of the spirits that he was in contact with. The answers were impressively devoid of rancor and exceptionally illuminating. Many confirming experiences are found in the revelations of those who have had “near death experiences” (NDEs). Several notable persons are Dr. Eben Alexander, Anita Moorjani, and Don Piper,

I just Googled NDEs and up jumped 708,000 hits. There is actually too much to read. Read with a discerning eye. YouTube video accounts are probably the best source because the person who experienced the NDE will almost invariably talk with humility and yet with genuine awe from having had the most profound experience of his or her life.

Put together the 15 million persons who adhere to Spiritism, the voices of spirits, the tens of thousands of NDEs that all follow nearly the same journey, the cohesiveness of reincarnation as the most plausible way to rise up from brutes and tyrants to very wise and humble spirits, and you have a theory of enlightenment that deserves some serious thought.

Did I mention there is no such place as “hell?