Guest Author - Andrea Gardiner, Ph.D.

Isn’t it funny the limitation that language places on expression? In this civilized world language is placed in very high regard. It is seen as the pinnacle of communication and is an example of the progress of the educated man. Words are however very limiting as they force you to place your idea within a certain framework. For instance, the statement that I desire to make is this, “the consequence of death is the loss of life,” but it is very easy for those words to be misconstrued from the actual vibration I am wishing to put forth.

At first glance, the statement appears to reaffirm the concept of death that has been displayed by the institution of religion. It can convey the idea to the reader that death brings about the end of life. This is no different from the ego’s perception of death. I do not mean to imply or refer to the obvious end of physical focus that occurs at the time of death.

I will eventually describe what is meant by the statement made above, however I want to point out the significance of your point of view regarding the statement and in effect show you the actual consequence of death (or at least the concept of death). The concluding words “loss of life” holds the most weight in this statement. What is the loss of life and do you regard death as its cause? I am sure many will answer this question with a yes. They will say “of course the end of life is caused by death.” The next question would then have to be what do you consider life? If your answer to the first question was yes then this will lead you to the definition of life that you hold within your mind. Not the cute, nice, philosophical definition that you say to others in response to this question. I mean the answer that drives you, the answer that underlies every thought and action that you produce. The answer that is so engrained within you it seems unconscious yet it shows up in every move that you make.

If your answer to the first question was yes then your understanding of life goes something like this: life is a period in time when you are able to physically grow, change, metabolize and reproduce. Reproduction in your definition may not even be limited to producing an offspring but can also refer to the reproduction that occurs within the cells of your body. Your definition of life will be very organic; in other words you consider yourself alive when you are not dead.

The consequence of death that I am referring to is found in this definition. The loss of life I am pointing at is the very definition of life that springs from the idea of death. If you simply see life as an organic process then you hold limited view of life. You do not consider all that existence has to offer. You do not consider existence; you contemplate mechanical biology and scientific processes. When you deliberate the idea of death you deliberate your restricted view of life.

The consequence of death is the loss of life. Can you see now what I am referring to with this statement? If you hold the vibration of death, the concept of death, the idea of death within your mental body then you will rob yourself of the full experience of life. You cannot truly live when you believe that you will die.