Who Would I Encounter in a Psychomanteum?

I sit on a low chair in a small, dimly lit room. A candle burns behind me. In front of me stands a long rectangular mirror.  I am seated at an angle to the mirror so that I don’t see my own image.

As I’ve been instructed to do, I think about family members who are now dead. My father, who died when I was a child before I really got to know him. My mother, with whom I had a tumultuous relationship. My grandmother, whose long, excruciating ordeal with cancer cast a heavy haze over my early life. A few aunts who played their roles in our family drama. A man I dated a few years ago, who died suddenly of a heart attack. I didn’t get to say good-bye or tell him how much he meant to me.

The twilit room becomes dream-like. I feel sleepy, as if I’ve been drugged. Reality’s grip loosens. What Dr. Moody promised seems possible.

The mirror’s surface dissolves, pulling my gaze into the realm its image reveals.

I wait.

Something happens in the mirror. An outline at first, then a cloudy image. Then, slowly, a face appears.

. . . . . . .

My Aunt Susie was what people in our small town called a card-carrying New Ager.

In Cumberland, Maryland, many folks demonstrated their allegiance to mainstream conservative Christianity by attending services at one of the local Catholic or Protestant churches. Others attended one of the synagogues.

Meanwhile, Aunt Susie trekked off to yoga retreats, underwent past-life regression hypnosis, consulted her astrological chart, and studied the teachings of a long-dead guru known mysteriously as “the Tibetan.”

She believed in reincarnation. She believed that we live many lives—passing from life, to death, to life—as we work to resolve our karma and reach spiritual perfection.   

One of nine children in a large eastern Appalachian family, she had twenty-four nieces and nephews. For reasons I’ll never understand, she singled me out from among them.

She claimed that she could see people’s auras. And mine, she said, was golden. 

She saw to it that I was schooled in transcendental meditation and hatha yoga. And she provided an endless supply of books for me to read on the trendiest New Age subjects.

. . . . . . .

When I was sixteen, Aunt Susie gave me the book Life after Life.

In it, psychologist and philosopher Dr. Raymond Moody coined the term near-death experience to define the descriptions shared with him by people who had been pronounced clinically dead but had then recovered and survived. He offered his research as evidence that our consciousness survives our death and lives on in another realm.

Moody identified common elements of the experiences of those who have died and returned to life. The sensation of moving through a dark tunnel toward a bright light. Encounters with deceased loved ones or religious figures. A life review during which one sees the details of one’s life in rapid succession. A choice being offered: stay in the afterlife or return to life to realize one’s unfulfilled purpose.

“Don’t fear death,” Aunt Susie said as she handed me the book. “It is just a transition to another life. When we die, we go to a joyful, peaceful place.”

When her parents were on their deathbeds, she sat faithfully and kept watch at their bedsides. She spoke to them just above a whisper, reminding them over and over what they should expect as they transitioned from life to the afterlife. You’ll enter a tunnel. You’ll see a light, she promised. Follow the light. Trust the light.  

As a teenager, I read and re-read Moody’s book. I listened to Aunt Susie, who was by then my spiritual mentor.

At that time, I embraced the idea of the afterlife that she envisioned without question.

. . . . . . .

A few days ago, I saw on display at my local library Raymond Moody’s new book, Proof of Life after Life: Seven Reasons to Believe There Is an Afterlife.

The word proof in the title jolted me.

Decades earlier, Moody defined near-death experiences as evidence of an afterlife, not proof.  Now, the title suggested, he had found proof.  What could he mean?

In this new book, he introduces a new term: the shared death experience. According to Moody, these are instances in which “a person’s death experience was somehow conveyed to a bystander who would then experience it.”

Moody and his co-writer Paul Perry claim that “to present proof of such a bold belief as consciousness surviving bodily death, the event would have to be witnessed by at least one other person,” a bystander who somehow shares in a dying or dead person’s experience.

Moody’s book provides accounts of such bystander experiences. Someone at a loved one’s deathbed observes the body of the dying person glowing supernaturally or sees a mist rise from the body at the moment of death. Someone who is unaware that a loved one is dying sees an apparition of the loved one and learns later that the vision occurred at the time the person died. A family member witnesses the appearance of a deceased family member at the loved one’s deathbed, as if the deceased person arrives to lead the dying person into the next life.

Those accounts are intriguing, but are they proof of an afterlife?

Hardly. 

To make such a claim is nothing more than sloppy pseudo-science.

In the final chapter of Proof of Life after Life, Moody describes what he calls a psychomanteum. A space dedicated to the contemplation of and perhaps to communication with the deceased, it consists of a dimly lit room containing a mirror or other reflective surface. Grieving people are invited to sit in the room, gaze into the mirror, and wait for their departed loved ones to either appear in the mirror or in some other way make their presence known.   

Moody admits that the psychomanteum experience may consist more of grief therapy than of actual communication with the dead. A grieving person sits in a quiet, darkened space thinking about the lost loved one. Perhaps the person achieves a hypnotic state that prompts an imagined encounter with the dead. Or perhaps the person simply sits for a while processing the grief and working toward emotional recovery.

The therapeutic benefit of this contemplation of the dead seems plausible. However, Moody offers the psychomanteum experiences described by grieving people as one of the Seven Reasons to Believe There Is an Afterlife.  He presents them as one of his “proofs.”

Now, decades after Aunt Susie introduced me to Moody and his work, I can’t help but make greater demands on his research. I can’t help but question the reliance on people’s subjective experiences when gathered around a family member’s death bed, for instance, as evidence or proof of anything.

Over the years, my faith in Aunt Susie’s New Age philosophy has dried up and disintegrated into dust.

My golden aura has turned to brass.

I have earned degrees. I have been trained in the scientific method. I know that accounts of people’s experiences—people who may be overwhelmed by their loved one’s impending death and perhaps grief-stricken—can hardly be relied upon as proof of an afterlife. 

Here is a case in point.

When she was eighty years old, Aunt Susie died unexpectedly alone in her home. After she died, several family members went to the mortuary to view her remains.  I was not one of them, but I heard the various reports of what they observed.

A few said that she had died with a smile on her face. Some described her as looking joyful, expectant, at peace.

Others, however, reported that they saw pain reflected on her face. They saw an expression of suffering or of fear. 

So, perhaps Aunt Susie passed through a tunnel, following a light. Perhaps she was met there by her deceased parents and siblings, who welcomed her and led her further into the light. Perhaps she entered an afterlife that was much as she had anticipated.

Or, perhaps her final moments were fraught with distress and discomfort. Perhaps she was frightened to be alone as she died. 

The subjective reports of those who observed her remains leave questions.

. . . . . . .

Here in this twilit room, sleepiness overtakes me. I feel heavy, as if I’m being pressed down onto the chair on which I sit. The silence is overpowering.

The candle flickers, then rights itself.

The image in the mirror grows blurry.  The face that seemed to emerge out of the grayness fades, reappears, then fades again. 

I catch glimpses, but only for a second at a time.

Then, the face is gone.

. . . . . . .

Death is the most sensitive of subjects.  I approach it with utmost respect for the emotions and beliefs of anyone who is reading this.   

I would never question anyone’s report of what happened during such a critical event as a loved one’s death. I would never doubt a person who describes such an experience.

I believe in the value of anecdotal evidence. But to offer it as proof—of anything?  No.

I believe in an afterlife. I believe primarily because I want to believe. 

I was raised in a religious tradition that was founded on an expectation of a future bodily resurrection. I was also taught by my aunt New Age philosophy and parapsychology which claim not only that the afterlife exists but that we can detect evidence and see glimpses of it.

The concept of an afterlife that has persisted throughout history and forms the foundation of some religions is, if nothing else, useful. It helps people cope with the tragedies in their lives and with the ever-present awareness of their mortality. 

The prospect of visiting a psychomanteum would have appealed to my teenage self. I might have hoped for an encounter with my father, who died when I was twelve. Or I might have wanted to confirm my hope that death is not the end of consciousness.

But my older, more discriminating self sees no point in conducting such an experiment.

My aura is tarnished.  There is no turning back. 

. . . . . . .

No, no.  I’m wasting my time.

This room is nothing more than smoke (from the candle) and mirrors (or more accurately, the mirror before me).

The trancelike state into which I descended dissolves. I feel as if I’m waking from a long sleep. The room regains its place in the real world—the one governed by the five senses and by rational thought.

I didn’t really want to encounter any of my dead family members here, anyway. My father has been gone for decades. He is a distant stranger. My relationships with some of my other close family members who have died were troubled.  I don’t have any desire to make contact with them.

Then, I see her.  Or do I only wish to see her?

Aunt Susie, lighting up the mirror with an exuberant smile.

Or have I fallen into a dream?

She’s nodding. Yes, her face says. Yes.

She’s reassuring me that it was true all along.

She’s there in the mirror to show me that I don’t need to worry about death and the afterlife.

She’s promising me that everything will be all right.



10 responses to “Who Would I Encounter in a Psychomanteum?”

  1.     This subject is totally confused by jargon and terminology. I would say that when I speak about I the entity speaking or writing is the Ego brain-bound and contained willful construct. It does not communicate directly with anything that might be considered “supernatural,” “spiritual,” or other undefined things of a “psychic” nature.
        It would take a whole book to try to unravel the mixed-up vocabulary for the second component of “consciousness.” Freud really screwed up vocabulary because he, himself, often in his writings confused the German words for “subconscious” and “unconscious.” So, anyway, I like to call it the “subconscious” even when I get a bunch of nasty comments saying that “unconscious” is the proper term. But hell, I only consider that when someone hits me on the head with a bat that I’m “unconscious.” Otherwise, there is a constant subtle communication between the conscious and the as I like to call it, the subconscious mind. This is the crux of the problem. There is a barrier between the two that varies in its porousness or transparency.
        Quieting the ego and lowering the barrier is the goal of the various exercises. There is no intrinsic value to the various objects — they are focus aids that are metaphorical or triggers. Whatever one is willing to let work will do. Being calm and visually unfocused while looking into the corner of a dark room, a dark cloth, the black bottom of a crystal ball, the black dregs of a tea cup, or looking into a mirror, all have the same purpose. But the religious, new age, or atheist derogatory labels put on these methods some of which look silly makes discussion almost impossible.
        I think what they all have in common is to acknowledge that the parts of the brain that in summary constitute my “subconscious” would be the entity that might communicate to things in a non-physical space outside the brain and body. Whatever the communication is, it would not be electromagnetic like light, radio, microwave etc.
        There have been experiments tried, but even when they succeeded they were rejected. I’ve forgotten most of them because they were all eventually ridiculed by the elites in each related fields because it did not fit their paradigms and vocabulary. There was that person who locked away a long message in a safe and promised that after he died he would communicate pieces of the message to twenty friends around the world. Their instructions were to relay whatever they sensed after his death secretly to a central location where an administrator would hold them until all of them reported and then the safe would be opened to compare. It worked and was rejected.
        There was that one where they put trays hung from the ceiling with various objects on them in the emergency room of the hospital where people having out-of-body experiences could see what was in the trays…
        So I’d say drop the religious, scientific, philosophical, and atheist terminology and proceed as if it were ordinary like a dream. So who writes the screen play for the dream at night?
        Generally, I’d say that everyone is wrong in some aspect. People feel guilty about believing in the thing, but the play’s the thing.

    Like

    1. Hi, Doug.

      I love what you say here: “I think what they all have in common is to acknowledge that the parts of the brain that in summary constitute my “subconscious” would be the entity that might communicate to things in a non-physical space outside the brain and body.”

      I’m fully convinced that my un/sub conscious leads a life of its own and communicates with (what?) outside of my body. Too many times have I had inklings about the presence of un/sub— to question that this is happening.

      I also love that you say that everyone is wrong in some way. Everyone, mostly me.

      Always good to end with a Shakespeare quote. 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Thanks Georgia. Yes, I agree: there is no proof. But as bad as modern studies are, the ancient scripts are worse. They were written by people who had no concept of science at all (or very little). And the chain-of-custody of various translations can not be established. Although I can think of one example of ancient subjective observation for science: Hippocrates of Kos observed that when some people urinated in the sand that ants gathered around the spot. He later tasted the urine and it tasted sweet. That’s where the term diabetes mellitus comes from meaning “sweet urine”. This is why so many people are pissed off.

        Like

      2. Ha! Doug, you’re the best.

        Like

  2. I could write a whole blogpost in response to this, in fact, I’ve written on the subject a few times already. I want to think about this for a while before I respond but I wanted to let you know I read it and enjoyed it. Is the italicized part fictionalized or is it based on real experience. We used to do something similar in college and it always freaked me out.

    Like

    1. Thanks for reading, Jeff. I’m looking forward to your thoughts on this. I always value your feedback.

      The italicized parts are fictionalized–me imagining what an experience in the psychomanteum might be like. Actually, I think I probably experimented with mirror-gazing in my teens, though I don’t remember a specific incident, and I certainly wasn’t visited by any departed souls.

      Seeing Moody’s book at the library brought back a deluge of memories about Aunt Susie, whom I adored. I miss her.

      Like

      1. Italicizing is a tricky business. I wish there were more than two standardized fonts that everyone accepts and understands as a change of voice. I often find “he said” and “she said” to be disruptive for me except that I often get confused and lost about who is speaking without it.
            In my blog-novel I had some characters communicating by telepathy. I didn’t know how to notate it. Italics for a thought didn’t exactly work well which brings up the Aunt Susie milieu. In a lot of movies and Twilight Zone type presentations they use a stage whisper or conspiratorial tone of voice to indicate a thought. The problem with this is that they are still using English sentences to convey a thought. From what I’ve read and from 3 of my own experiences, thoughts come as metaphorical dream-like images. I’ll give my shortest example:

        I spoke to my brother on the telephone. He was trying to decide where he and his girlfriend would go that day for entertainment. I told him I was doing meditation exercises and he should not say another word, but I would call him back. During meditation I saw a galloping horse. I called him back and asked if he could relate to this. He said that they decided to go to the racetrack to bet on the horses. He had never been before so this was not his habit or something I would have normally guessed. So if it were a dialogue it’s not “where do you want to go” with an answer of “the racetrack.” It’s more like thoughts please. Answer: I’m showing you — look. There’s no English here.

        Like

      2. So much of our communication lies outside of language. Gestures, facial expressions, of course. But I’m convinced there are other ways that communication happens that are less detectable–or we haven’t figured out how to detect them. I love language. Language is my first love. But it is limited in its ability to allow us to communicate.

        Like

  3. When I think of the afterlife, I think of the *next* life. Around 20 years ago, I decided that the concept of reincarnation on a path to enlightenment made the most sense to me. I can’t really say what drew me in that direction, it just felt right to me. I’ve recently learned of a scientific community that tracks instances of people recalling past lives. Some of their anecdotes are pretty convincing. I find it interesting how certain many Christians are about the tenets of their religion, especially their surety of an afterlife as a reward. I get that this is sort of the point of faith, but to go so far as argue one’s beliefs are correct when no one can really know, it makes no sense. Unsaid in your story is how your parents felt about this side education you were getting. I would think that many parents would step on that pretty quickly. No idea what mine would do. My brothers and I got sucked into a charismatic church youth group when we were kids. I later learned that my father thought the adults associated with that church were all snobs, but he let us go anyway.

    I like the side story you built into the essay. I think it works well. I did that once and then deleted it because I was unsure of myself. Wish I left it in.

    Like

    1. The idea that some part of us survives our physical death is so prevalent among historical periods and cultures that there must be something to it. I’ve always been drawn to Eastern philosophy with its concept of spiritual enlightenment, but I suppose that’s because Aunt Susie was teaching me those things, and she was a bright spot in my otherwise very troubled childhood.

      My mother wavered wildly in what she declared as her beliefs, depending on what belief would get her the most benefit in a given situation. (I’m being overly harsh, but I still have a lot of baggage regarding my mother.) Sometimes it was okay for me to believe Aunt Susie’s philosophy; sometimes it wasn’t. Consistency and rationality were never part of my mom’s mindset.

      Thanks again for giving me your feedback. I value it greatly.

      Like

Leave a comment