Evidence for the existence of the soul has appeared long ago, but it is ignored by mainstream science
Doctor of Historical Sciences, lecturer at the Department of Religious Studies at one of the Prague universities published a very interesting article in which he gave evidence of the existence of the soul from a scientific point of view …
Religious scholar, Doctor of Historical Sciences, lecturer at the Department of Religious Studies at one of Prague's universities Ruslan MADATOV published a very interesting article in which he cited evidence of the existence of the soul from a scientific point of view. The article interested the journalists of the ECHO newspaper and they decided to talk to Ruslan Vakhidovich directly on this topic. After all, if humanity accepts the fact of the existence and immortality of the soul as a scientific given, life on Earth cannot but transform for the better.
Why do you think that this knowledge will transform life on Earth? Believers already admit this fact
“Believers are one thing, but science, secular rulers are another. If we begin to officially recognize life as the next stage of being, we will build it in a completely different way, from a humanistic standpoint. We will begin to understand that we can either rise on the path of self-improvement, or destroy the soul for the sake of some momentary benefits: money, power, etc.
Evidence of the existence of the soul was given by many: scientists, including doctors, and religious leaders. What is the difference between your evidence?
- I decided to approach the issue from a scientific point of view, and from an esoteric, and from a strictly logical point of view. I tried not to touch purely religious dogmas - remembering that people with a practical mindset are moving further and further away from religion, seeing in it only an economic and political institution. At the same time, I understood that someone had already given some evidence, so I do not claim to be exclusive. I proceeded from the assumption that the more you talk about this topic, the better it will be for people - they will start thinking about not spoiling their lives.
Promotional video:
Based on the scientific foundations of the proofs of any theorem, I presented my proofs in stages. Let's start with consciousness. Many scientists have already recognized the fact that it does not belong to the brain, and, therefore, to the physical body. And also the fact that it is material. That it is material is proved by the simple fact that it exists. And if something exists, it is formed by some form of matter, which is the second question: if we cannot define or characterize anything, it does not follow that this form of matter does not exist. The main thing is that there is matter and there is no emptiness. And this is such a simple conclusion science cannot dare to make!
What prevents her - from your point of view - to make such a conclusion?
- First of all, the fact that we have not yet been able to agree on terms regarding the very concept of matter. What it is? What do we see-hear-feel? What can we, in extreme cases, fix with some devices? (Various rays, radiation, etc.) Yes, of course. But two hundred years ago no one could detect the same radiation. However, it is there. And there was. As you can see, the conclusion is simple, nowhere simpler: if at this stage of our technical development we cannot fix something, this only means that we have not yet come up with the necessary devices, and not at all that the sought object does not exist.
The very fact that the desired object exists is indirectly confirmed by the very same science. This is what physicists say: “It turned out that in order for all cosmic objects to move in space as they do now, the universe must be filled with some kind of unknown matter (“dark”matter), the mass of which, according to approximate calculations, is about ninety percent of the total mass in the universe."
What is the conclusion from this? What we can somehow fix with something is only the tip of the iceberg, the rest is hidden from our senses and devices. And it may well be that in the dark depths of the underwater part of the iceberg is the matter of consciousness.
However, as far as I know, there are already experiments on "making" the invisible visible
- Yes, for example, Academician Anatoly Fedorovich Okhatrin, who worked for Academician Korolev, head of the laboratory of biolocation and the Institute of Mineralogy, Geochemistry and Crystal Chemistry and Rare Elements, the founder of microlepton field theory, was able to make thoughts visible by inventing a special photoelectronic apparatus. Here is what he wrote on this topic: “We asked a psychic woman to radiate a kind of field, giving it information. When she did this, with the help of a photoelectric apparatus, we recorded what was happening. The photo showed how something like a cloud separates from the surrounding aura and begins to move on its own. Such thought-forms, saturated with certain moods and emotions, can take root in people and even influence them. Okhatrin is not alone; Professor Alexander Chernetsky conducted similar experiments. He managed to photograph a person's thought.
I can assume that it started here!.. Science answered the way it does in such cases: "This cannot be, because it can never be!"
- Quite right, it started. I will not talk about this in detail, for anyone interested, let him look on the Internet about the experiments of these wonderful scientists. Which, by the way, were carried out not even now, but back in the 80s.
You started with the fact that consciousness is material, does not belong to the brain and the physical body. But where exactly does the thinking process take place?
- The answer seems to be on the surface - in the brain, of course. At the same time, scientists have not yet succeeded in explaining the mechanism by which this very consciousness functions in it and how the thinking process takes place. True, there were scientists with an open mind, for example, Natalya Petrovna Bekhtereva. This is what this world-renowned neurophysiologist wrote: “I first heard the hypothesis that the human brain only perceives thoughts from somewhere outside from the lips of the Nobel laureate, Professor John Eccles. Of course, then it seemed absurd to me. But then research carried out in our St. Petersburg Research Institute of the Brain confirmed that we cannot explain the mechanics of the creative process. The brain can only generate the simplest thoughts, such as how to turn the pages of a book you are reading or stir up sugar in a glass. And the creative process is a manifestation of a completely new quality …”.
Other scientists cited as proof that thinking occurs somewhere else, the fact that changes in brain activity do not affect the thinking process in any way, referring to experiments when a tomograph recorded brain activity in a coma, in a state of hypnosis. And the fact that well-equipped modern science has not yet found a place in the brain where information is localized cannot be ignored either.
Earlier experiments - for example, already in the 1920s - are also very interesting. Thus, Carl Lashley, a well-known brain researcher at that time, irrefutably proved that conditioned reflexes in rats did not disappear after removing completely different parts of the brain in turn. Thus, he showed that in the brain there is no "specialized" area responsible for these reflexes. The same effect is observed in people - with the forced amputation of most of the brain, they retain all mental abilities. Everyone knows the phenomenon of the American Carlos Rodriguez, who lives without the frontal lobes of the brain (i.e. more than 60 percent of the brain is missing).
And this example is not unique. For example, in an essay by Dr. Robinson from the Paris Academy of Sciences, a case is described when a man lived to be 60 years old, led a normal life, suffered a head injury, died a month later, and only after an autopsy it turned out that he had practically no brain! The shell of the medulla was only the thickness of a sheet of paper. The German specialist Hoofland (who, by the way, after the described case completely revised all his medical views) had a similar case: in a deceased patient, who retained his mental and physical abilities until the moment when he was paralyzed, no brain was found in the cranium at all! Instead of a brain, it contained 300 grams of liquid.
One of the best watchmakers in the country, 55-year-old Jan Gerling, died in Holland in 1976. An autopsy showed that he also had a fluid like water instead of a brain. In Sheffield, Scotland, doctors were amazed that a student with an IQ of 126, which is above average, showed a complete brain absence on x-rays.
Well, they say that parts of the brain are able to take over the functions of the lost parts …
- Yes, they are, and such cases are also known. But water in the skull is also capable of ?! What about the case of the Scottish student? If there is an exception to the rule, the rule no longer works. By the way, the famous Latin phrase that there is an exception to any rule is nothing more than an incorrect translation: a rule does not work if there is at least one exception. Evidence that the process of thinking is not carried out in the brain was also the experiments of the psychiatrist Gennady Pavlovich Krokhalev, who dealt with the problem of recording visions. Back in 1979, he received a patent for photographing hallucinations of his patients with an ordinary camera and video camera. These fixations allowed him to treat patients. And in 2000, his article was published that these hallucinations and thoughts are not in the human brain, but somewhere outside.
Direct evidence of the existence of consciousness outside the body are also the descriptions by patients of their sensations during the exit of their consciousness from the body during clinical death. There are hundreds of thousands of such descriptions! People describe how they see themselves from the outside, how they are transported thousands of kilometers from their bodies and then clearly tell what they saw there, and everything coincides to the smallest detail. And here already the official science cannot do anything, a special name for such states was even invented: "the experience of being outside the body."
Of course, I am not an expert, but it seems to me that if you learn this, then the blind from birth will be able to know the world
- By the way, those who were blind from birth also fell into a state of clinical death and described what they saw. Some argue that this is a hallucination. What kind of hallucination can we talk about if a person is blind from birth and simply does not know what what he saw looks like ?!
In our last conversation, you expressed the idea that reincarnation is possible. So, maybe these visions of the blind from birth are just the experience of their past life, where they were sighted?
- Everything is possible, it is unprovable, but it is impossible to refute it. But as for your question about "learning", that is, examples of deliberate separation of consciousness from the physical body. Did a person learn this on purpose or is it innate ability, it doesn't even matter. Jeffrey Mishlava's The Roots of Consciousness describes in detail numerous studies of the phenomenon of exiting the physical body in the New York laboratory of the American Society for Psychical Research. Laboratory specialists received unequivocal evidence that when leaving the body of consciousness or astral double, this "double" clearly describes the places where it has been, shares the information it has collected there. There are even examples of the impact of this "double" on physical devices.
All this is very, very interesting, but what does this have to do directly with the proof of the existence of the soul?
- With these stories I let myself down in the thought that a person is nothing more than a certain energetic entity, “dressed” in a physical body. And consciousness - like the soul - does not belong to the body.
Did I understand correctly that consciousness in your understanding is the soul?
- Right! Consciousness is a material substance of a form of matter unknown to us today, which continues to exist even after the death of the “clothing” - the physical body. And in this regard, the immortal consciousness-soul is a more valuable and meaningful concept than even those that various beliefs and religions offer us. In any religion there are elements of mysticism, miracles, that is, everything that a person with a skeptical and analytical mindset denies. Here, there is only naked physics: the soul-consciousness exists regardless of religious preferences, it exists materially, its existence can be proved in the future not indirectly, but directly - with the help of devices that, I believe, will be created. Most importantly, she is immortal! This means that we, having given up the ends, do not die for good, as Vysotsky brilliantly said.
It turns out that you put an "equal" sign not only between consciousness and soul, but also between this and the personality?
- I'll bet! Feel free to put it!
And my soul, which I have, will always exist?
- It will, but only the very phrase "I have a soul", in my opinion, is incorrect. Moreover, it is wrong. It's like my suit said, "I have a man named Ruslan." You, I - we are souls dressed in bodies!
Is there any evidence of a unified system of personality-consciousness-soul and physical body?
- Yes, this is the so-called phantom effect, which is described by many scientists. Anyone interested in the topic of phantoms should remember a very famous photo. It was shot in special beams. The tree is missing part of the trunk and crown - after a lightning strike. However, in the photo we see as if a whole tree - non-existent branches, trunk and even foliage are noticeable. Non-existent in reality, but non-existent parts captured in the photo are just a phantom of a tree. What does this mean? The tree has lost some of its physical parts, but retained its subtle parts. It is like the “soul” of a tree. In the subtle world, it exists in its original form. This is what the photographer captured. Phantom parts completely repeat the shape of the essence of the tree, its "soul". The phantom effect manifests itself not only visually, but also in sensations. The effect of phantom pain has long been known when it hurts (itches,ache, itch) nonexistent, amputated limbs.
Phantom sensations are so strong that people with disabilities even try to stand on a non-existent leg - they fully feel it. Official medicine explains this by physiology. By this very "physiology" she explains everything that she cannot explain more clearly. However, even people with a broken spine have phantom sensations, and official medicine denies this and says that "physiologically, this is impossible." But this is there! Psychiatrists talk about the mental nature of this phenomenon, but they cannot explain phantom sensations in people with disabilities since childhood who were born without an arm or leg. However, it turns out that the phantom memory of never existed limbs is inherent in the very essence of man. Some say - in the genes, I will say - in the soul.
Or is it again a memory of a past life, where the arms and legs were in place?
- This will be only additional proof of the immortality of the soul.
Then it turns out that the role of the soul-consciousness-personality is much more important in the formation of both the organism and human sensations?
- Quite right! Academician Nikolai Viktorovich Levashov writes about it this way: “When asked how the development of a human embryo (like any other living organism) occurs, brave biologists and physicians, with great faith in their knowledge, often with a condescending smile to the question of an ignoramus, famously answer: “different hormones and enzymes appear in different zygotic cells (cells of the embryo) and, as a consequence, a brain develops from one zygotic cell, a heart from another, lungs from a third, etc., etc.” …
But how, how do they know what to develop into? Genes speak? How convenient it is to explain everything by genes, especially since no one really understands what it is! When the first cell divides, two appear, ABSOLUTELY IDENTITY to each other! Then the process repeats itself, and now we have hundreds of the same cells identical to each other! It turns out that ALL cells of the embryo have identical genetics. So where do bone, brain, enzyme, etc. cells come from? Not a single biologist or physician will give you a clear answer! And if we take as a basis the materialistic perception of the world, based on the laws of physics known to us today, then there will be no answer NEVER!
And if we take as a basis not a materialistic explanation of the universe, but the presence of a soul that controls all processes, then the answer will be?
- It seems to me that everyone has already understood this! Except for official science! (Laughs) See what the same Levashov writes:
"Research on the electrical potentials around plant seeds has yielded phenomenal results. After processing the data, scientists (Herold Burr from Yale University, et al.) Were surprised to find that, in 3D projection, the measurement data around the buttercup seed formed the shape of an adult buttercup plant. The seed had not yet laid down in the fertile soil, had not even "hatched" yet, and the form of an adult plant is already here, right here … This energetic form only needed to be filled with atoms and molecules for the flower to become real, visible to our eyes."
It seems to me absolutely obvious that the soul is the very matrix that determines the form and content of the future person. And any other creature - you need to be consistent, everything has a soul.
But how does all this actually happen? There is a fertilized egg, which began to divide into identical cells … And then what? To these hundreds of identical cells "sticks" some elusive entity for the time being by our devices and begins to control the structure? To bring it to mind - how with that buttercup?
- Quite right! It is not for nothing that almost all religions say that the soul does not appear from the moment of conception, but later - when there is something to "stick to". The human brain in this case is a kind of receiver that receives information from the personality-consciousness-soul. Information - a guide to action. It is not for nothing that the neurons of the brain are very similar to the transceiver device, even purely in appearance! Any biologist familiar with physical electrical circuits will tell you this.
If the neurons of the brain can receive information from the soul, like a radio, then they should be able - in theory - and transmit information to the surrounding space? Maybe this can explain both telepathic abilities and clairvoyance? And the transmission of thoughts over a distance?
- I think it's obvious! Academician Natalya Petrovna Bekhtereva, whom I simply admire, says this on this topic: “The brain is fenced off from the outside world by several shells, it is decently protected from mechanical damage. However, through all these membranes, we register what happens in the brain, and the loss in the signal amplitude when passing through these membranes is surprisingly small - in relation to direct registration from the brain, the signal decreases in amplitude by no more than two to three times (if it decreases at all !).
The possibility of direct activation of brain cells by a factor of the external environment and, in particular, by electromagnetic waves, carried out in the process of therapeutic electromagnetic stimulation, is easily proved by the developing effect …”. What other proof is needed? Only physical. We are waiting for the necessary instruments from physicists!
In principle, everything is clear. But let's touch on the topic of reincarnation again. How does the theory of reincarnation fit into your evidence for the existence and immortality of the soul?
- The very fact of reincarnation proves, if not immortality, then a very, very long life of the soul, at least for a period of several human lives.
Can the fact of reincarnation be considered scientifically proven?
- There are too many cases documented by scientists to be dismissed. Here are just a couple. In the 70s in Berlin, a 12-year-old girl, after an injury, spoke Italian, which she did not know as her native language. But she did not just speak, but claimed that she was Italian, Rosetta, and was born in 1887. She also named the address where she lived. The parents took the girl to this address in Italy, the old woman opened the door. She turned out to be the daughter of the very woman Rosetta, whose soul entered the girl. According to her, her mother died in 1917. The girl, seeing the old woman, exclaimed that this was her daughter and her name was Frans. The old woman was actually called França.
Another case was in India. The girl from birth said that she was a grown man, that she had a wife, children, and named the place where she lived. Her parents took her to that village, where she unmistakably recognized the house, in the house - her room, and in order to be believed, she pointed out the place where she had buried coins in a tin box in a past life. They found the box. These are cases of a conscious reincarnation, a kind of soul settling into a body in which another soul lives. Therefore, they are rather an exception. But there are cases when people simply remember - under hypnosis, in a state of change of consciousness - their past lives. And they bring evidence.
To summarize, what is the conclusion?
- The soul exists. It can be called a subtle body, which is a "house" for the personality, the essence of a person, his consciousness, memory, thinking. This subtle body does not die along with the physical body, transmigrating after physical death into another body. The statement that the soul after the death of the body dwells in some places such as heaven, hell or purgatory, or in abstract "heaven" seems to me incorrect. More precisely, the very formulation of the names of these "places" is incorrect. The soul, it seems to me, depending on its spiritual development, on its settings, on sensations, on the actions of the body during life, gets into different bodies in the next life. And it will be either "heaven" for her, or "hell". Here I have not discovered anything new (laughs), all this is in Hinduism. If your thoughts, thoughts, desires were pure, your karma is not spoiled, your next life will be better than the previous one. Well,but if the opposite is true …
Therefore, I argue that if humanity at the official level recognizes the existence and immortality of the soul, it will not flood the planet with negativity, anger, death of their own kind. And all this, mind you, coincides with the basic tenets of almost all religions: do not kill, do not steal, and so on.
Astor: Ruslan Madatov