Quasi-Dead Monks

[ysabetwordsmith]

Some Tibetan monks seem to die, but their bodies do not start decaying until days or weeks later, rather than just a few minutes as usual. According to Tibetan tradition, they are not yet dead but in a final meditative state called thukdam. Scientists studying this phenomenon have failed to find any electrical activity in the brain, but neither have they come up with a materialist explanation for why this happens.


I'm not sure of the mechanics myself, but I'd look for other electromagnetic fields or patterns. If the monk has expanded outside his body but not abandoned it yet, that might keep it fresh.

I'd also be very interested in what's happening with the nonhuman organisms that inhabit a human body. What is the signal that causes them to switch activity shortly after a standard death? And then, what's different in thukdam? Something is either causing a delay in the signal, or blocking it for a considerable time.

I wonder whether the monks experience brain growth after death. However, I am extremely disinclined to mess with the bodies until they begin to decay, and I'm not sure how long the evidence of such growth would survive.

Bacteria don't think the monks are dead yet. Do flies? What about any other organisms generally tasked with disposing of dead things? Would they respond if offered the opportunity? Or is it, "Knock it off, nosy neighbor. Dude hasn't put his trash can out yet. Whenever he does that, then we'll pick it up."

We do know that in several branches of Buddhism, monks have managed to mummify themselves while alive, a process called sokushinbutsu. While they engage in a lengthy reductive diet before death by enlightenment, it is noted that they also aim to die in a meditative state. So that's another meditation-related example of death not accompanied by immediate decay, suggesting a relation or communication between meditation and decay processes. The use of diet, and the fact that much of decay begins in the gut, makes me wonder if the gut-brain communication loop might be involved in these phenomena.

EDIT 8/12/21 -- mama_kestrel pointed out incorruptibility in Catholicism as another example.

Important takeaway: if a Buddhist monk seems to be dead, it is safest to leave the body alone unless or until fellow monks say that it may be moved. If they have their own traditions to follow, back off and let them do that.  As this has very rarely occurred in other cases, I would extend that to not messing with any body that is not decaying as expected.  You don't want to be treating a body as dead that might not actually be all the way dead.

Comments

[mama_kestrel]

The Catholic Church has historically considered failure to decay as strongly indicative of sainthood. I wonder how they reconcile such incorruptibility among non-Christians, or if they even bother to try.

Thank you!

[ysabetwordsmith]

>>The Catholic Church has historically considered failure to decay as strongly indicative of sainthood.<<

I have added a reference to this.

>> I wonder how they reconcile such incorruptibility among non-Christians, or if they even bother to try.<<

The more rigid ones probably prefer not to think about it. The more open-minded are inclined to acknowledge that holy people can appear in other religions too.

*ponder* And now I'm thinking about all the trees ordained as Buddhist monks, and whether any of them will prove incorruptible. That would be very interesting.

Re: Thank you!

[(Anonymous)]

>>The more rigid ones probably prefer not to think about it. The more open-minded are inclined to acknowledge that holy people can appear in other religions too.<<

Some traditionalists might not know or believe that it can happen elsewhere.

[(Anonymous)]

>>As this has very rarely occurred in other cases, I would extend that to not messing with any body that is not decaying as expected. You don't want to be treating a body as dead that might not actually be all the way dead.<<

This is actually why the tradition of leaving bodies out for awhile started.

People eventually picked up on the fact that "dead" people would occasionally wake up and attempt to crawl out of their graves, sometimes successfully, sometimes not.

And anyone who noticed the "crawling out and wandering around" process was understandably creeped out. Which (along with plague/s) may have lead to the mythology of several kinds of undead...

I also recall reading somewhere that funeral practices and respect for the dead are a "buffer zone" of sorts, because having no buffer between a person and [components of formerly living thing] is going to involve some unpleasant spillover from the treatment of the latter to the treatment of the former.

Thoughts

[ysabetwordsmith]

>> This is actually why the tradition of leaving bodies out for awhile started. <<

I thought so.

>> People eventually picked up on the fact that "dead" people would occasionally wake up and attempt to crawl out of their graves, sometimes successfully, sometimes not.<<

For a while, there was quite a tradition of escape mechanisms and alarms to deal with fear of being trapped in a coffin.

>>I also recall reading somewhere that funeral practices and respect for the dead are a "buffer zone" of sorts, because having no buffer between a person and [components of formerly living thing] is going to involve some unpleasant spillover from the treatment of the latter to the treatment of the former.<<

Logical.

Different traditions have very different ideas about when and how the spirit really separates from the body. Some of this variation may come from nurture more than nature. Are you supposed to bug out immediately, wait for a guide, wait for a specific ceremony, or wait a particular amount of time? This can vary depending on how much training you have and where you are going.

Re: Thoughts

[(Anonymous)]

>>I thought so.<<

To be fair, I think it had more to do with plagues and brain fevers than holy men...

>>Different traditions have very different ideas about when and how the spirit really separates from the body.<<

There's at least one tradition where they bring the dead out to participate in festivals. Literally.

Ha, found it!
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Famadihana

I also found this, if anyone is interested:
https://www.fodors.com/news/photos/14-death-festivals-around-the-world

Re: Thoughts

[ysabetwordsmith]

There are a number of cultures that still consider the dead part of the family. Mexicans picnic in cemeteries for this reason. It is a lot healthier than America's death-phobic culture.

Re: Thoughts

[(Anonymous)]

Leaving gifts for Grandpa at the family altar, yeah.

Actually disintering Grandpa for a party as a regular thing...that's a bit more unusual, I think.

Cultural differences can be fascinating, irritating, and take some getting used to!

Re: Thoughts

[fianna9]

That might be part of where the ideas of sitting up with the dead originated from in different areas. You kept an eye on the corpse to make certain the person was actually dead while keeping an eye on the living to make certain they were coping okay with the loss.

Re: Thoughts

[ysabetwordsmith]

That makes sense, but it requires choosing someone among the attendants who is distant enough from the deceased that they aren't overwhelmed with grief. Hence why some cultures name a number that is larger than immediate families typically are.

[siberian_skys]

It shows you how long it's been since I went to catechism. I'd forgotten about the incorruptibility of a body being an indication of sainthood.

What I do remember from a documentary, I think it was about vampirism, that back in the day they used to put bells in the coffin so if someone was still alive when buried they could ring the bell. Come to think of it, I think the bell was outside the grave and there was something to pull inside the coffin. I am not impressed by my aging brain. I guess I should be grateful that I got the final Jeopardy question right tonight.

[(Anonymous)]

Yep. Bell aboveground, and they somehow rigged it with a cord so if the person started thrashing the bell would start ringing.

Now vampirism...a version of that traces back to plagues. They would bury people in a mass grave, and later, if they had more dead folks, they might have to reopen it to add more bodies.

At which point they might get to see a corpse that looked fatter and seemed to have "eaten" through the shroud. (Actually both of these are results of decomposition.)

Now obviously, (since forensic anthropology, pathology and germ theory were yet to be invented) this was a vampire, feeding on the earthly remains of the poor plague victims! Treatment: shove a brick in the vampire's mouth, so it can't eat any more.

[(Anonymous)]

It occurs to me that this may be the reason why many creatures will try to "wake the dead" until it becomes obvious that they are in fact dead.

There are several extant examples of animal parents trying to wake and tend deceased offspring, sometimes for a very long time. (Special note to dolphins - they will keep trying to get the baby to breathe.) (Second note: apparently there is a way for humans to do CPR on dolphins, at least the babies.)

And there are several examples in human literature of "dead" infants waking up while the parents are holding them and saying their goodbyes - or occasionally in the morgue.

Yes ...

[ysabetwordsmith]

That makes sense.

There's also at least one well-documented case on Everest of a climber believed dead of hypothermia who managed to revive and walk to camp.

Re: Yes ...

[erulisse]

Yet another example of the reason for that old saw about not actually being dead until you're -warm- and dead.

Re: Yes ...

[ysabetwordsmith]

I'm with Lady Vorkosigan:

"Mile is dead! Really, truly, frozen dead."

"I won't believe Miles is dead until he's dead and rotted."