Near-Death Experience and Russian Theology: Sergius Bulgakov’S Near-Death Experience

NEAR-DEATH EXPERIENCE AND RUSSIAN THEOLOGY: SERGIUS BULGAKOV’S NEAR-DEATH EXPERIENCE

Walter N. Sisto (D’Youville College)

A 2001 study by Parnia and Yeates approximates that eighteen percent of cardiac arrest survivors had near-death experience (NDE).1 Whether the NDE is caused by an unknown psychological or physiological factor or the soul’s departure from the body is a matter of debate. Nevertheless, millions of people have experienced an NDE and credit it as a positive, life-altering event. The last two decades have witnessed a myriad of publications from psychologists, philosophers, and medical doctors on NDEs. Yet, relatively little has been published on the role of NDEs in organized religion, specifically research that examines if NDEs have influenced or continue to influence religion. A few notable publications on this topic include comparative studies of religious/mystical experience and NDEs by Greyson (2014), Cressy (1994), Badham (1997), Pennacho (1986), and Stace (1960).2 These studies demonstrate that although popular interest in NDEs is a recent phenomenon,3 NDEs themselves are not recent. Religious/mystical experiences, in fact, that are a hallmark of Christian mysticism share substantial similarities with NDE accounts.4 Similarities include encounters with God/light, feeling of

1 Cf. S. Parnia, D.G. Waller, R. Yeates, and P. Fenwick, ‘A qualitative and quantitative study of the incidence, features and aetiology of near death experiences in cardiac arrest survivors’, Resuscitation, 48 (2001), pp. 149-156. 2 Cf. Bruce Greyson, ‘Congruence Between Near-Death and Mystical Experience’, The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 24 (2014), pp. 298-310; J. Cressy, The near-death experience: Madness or mysticism? (Boston, 1994); P. Badham, ‘Religious and near-death experiences in relation to belief in a future life’, Mortality, 2 (1994), pp. 7-21; J. Pennachio, ‘Near-death experience as mystical experience’, Journal of Religion and Health, 25 (1986), pp. 64-72. 3 The preponderance of accounts by NDErs has led more than a few skeptics to claim that NDEs are modern phenomena, a result of the ‘Oprah effect’. (Cf. Raymond A. Moody, The last laugh: A new philosophy of near-death experiences, apparitions, and the paranormal (Charlottesville, VA, 1999), pp. 12-13). 4 The mysticism of Julian of Norwich is a notable example. Julian’s The Revelations of Divine Love that was written in the fourteenth-century explains sixteen revelations she received from Jesus Christ during a near-death experience. 108 Walter N. Sisto exceptional peace or joy, and a life-changing perspective.5 However, this research is largely concerned with comparisons between NDEs and mystical experiences, not the influence of NDEs on religion or a specific religious personality. NDEs’ life-changing perspective is known as an aftereffect. That aftereffects generally lead to great religious fervor or life changes suggest that NDEs may play a role in organized religion, particularly religious traditions that are informed by mystics or leaders that purport to have come back from the dead. My goal in this paper is to contribute to the research on NDEs for religious leaders. This article will examine the purported near-death experiences of Rev. Sergius N. Bulgakov (1886-1946). Father Bulgakov is best known for his controversial work known as Sophiology. Today Bulgakov is under- going a renaissance, particularly in the North America. Although most of the research over the past two decades has focused on Bulgakov’s philosophical writings, the past few years have examined his theology.6 This article is situated in the latter phase of Bulgakov research, to understand possible motiva- tions for Bulgakov’s theology as well as to provide valuable information about his biography. Bulgakov, who has been described as a mystic,7 had multiple religious/ mystical experiences throughout his life. However, relevant to this study were two religious experiences that resulted from serious illnesses in 1926 and 1939. Bulgakov published the full account of his experience in Sofiologiia smerti or The Sophiology of Death (1940). This article analyzes Bulgakov’s 1926 and 1939 experiences and deter- mines if these experiences comport to a clinical understanding of an NDE. The article also examines some of the aftereffects associated with Bulgakov’s

5 Moreover, NDE-like experiences not are exclusive to the Christian religion. In Tibetan Buddhism, there are deloks or people who return from the dead and teach about their encounter in the afterlife. For more information on NDEs in various religious traditions see Paul Badham, ‘Religious and near-death experiences in relation to belief in a future’, Mortality, 2.1 (1997), pp. 7-21. 6 Interestingly, the renaissance of Bulgakov’s theology seems to be largely a Western, English and non-Orthodox phenomena. Bulgakov’s theology is generally ignored by Orthodox Russian theologians. 7 Cf. Michael Plekon, Living Icons: Persons of Faith in the Eastern Church (Notre Dame, IN, 2002), pp. 29-58. Near-Death Experience and Russian Theology 109 experiences. To accomplish this task, I will use recent scholarship on NDEs, including the Greyson scale.

1. What is an NDE?

Before we embark on this investigation, we ought to define our terms. When I speak of a NDE, I mean ‘a profound subjective [event] often experienced on the threshold of death’.8 Research on NDEs reveal that there are a spectrum of NDEs. To help ascertain the various causes of an NDE as well as to differentiate different NDE experinces, researchers use the Greyson scale which is the dominant tool used to assesss NDEs in clinical trials. The Greyson scale was developed by Dr. Bruce Greyson in 1983,9 for the purpose of differentiating expereiences associated with the dying process from experiences that do not have a clear physiological or psychological cause. Greyson’s scale allows researchers to differentiate an NDE from dreaming10 and to categorize the intensity of the NDE. Greyson’s research discovered common charateristics of an NDE and created a questioneire comprised of sixteen questions and three answers with an attributed score of 0 for no experience, 1 for an experience, or 2 for an intense experience. In normal circumstances, his scale would be administered as questionnaire for the perspective Near-Death Experiencer (NDEr) to complete. Because Bulgakov died in 1944, this is not possible. However, the in-depth account in his Sophiology of Death will allow me to evaluate his experience based on Greyson’s criteria and to determine the intensity and type of Bulgakov’s purported NDE. Here is the Greyson scale:11

8 Bruce Greyson, ‘The Near-Death Experience Scale: Construction, reliability, and validity’, Journal of Near-Death Studies, 8.3 (1990), pp. 151-161, on p. 151. 9 Bruce Greyson, ‘The Near-Death Experience Scale: Construction, reliability, and validity’, Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 171 (1983), pp. 369–375. 10 Ibid., p. 373. 11 Adapted from Bruce Greyson, ‘Altered States: The Near-Death Experience Scale: Construction, reliability, and validity, Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 171 (1983), pp. 369-375 in Lee Graves, ‘Science Analyze the Near-Death Experience’, University of Virginia Magazine, http://iands.org/research/nde-research/important-research-articles/698- greyson-nde-scale.html_. 110 Walter N. Sisto

1. Did time seem to speed up or slow down? 9. Were your senses more vivid than usual? 0 = No 0 = No 1 = Time seemed to go faster or slower than usual 1 = More vivid than usual 2 = Everything seemed to be happening at once; or 2 = Incredibly more vivid time stopped or lost all meaning 10. Did you seem to be aware of things going on 2. Were your thoughts speeded up? elsewhere, as if by extrasensory perception (ESP)? 0 = No 0 = No 1 = Faster than usual 1 = Yes, but the facts have not been checked out 2 = Incredibly fast 2 = Yes, and the facts have been checked out

3. Did scenes from your past come back to 11. Did scenes from the future come to you? you? 0 = No 0 = No 1 = Scenes from my personal future 1 = I remembered many past events 2 = Scenes from the world’s future 2 = My past flashed before me, out of my control 12. Did you feel separated from your body? 4. Did you suddenly seem to understand every- 0 = No thing? 1 = I lost awareness of my body 0 = No 2 = I clearly left my body and existed outside it 1 = Everything about myself or others 2 = Everything about the universe 13. Did you seem to enter some other, unearthly world? 5. Did you have a feeling of peace or pleasant- 0 = No ness? 1 = Some unfamiliar and strange place 0 = No 2 = A clearly mystical or unearthly realm 1 = Relief or calmness 2 = Incredible peace or pleasantness 14. Did you seem to encounter a mystical being or presence, or hear an unidentifiable voice? 6. Did you have a feeling of joy? 0 = No 0 = No 1 = I heard a voice I could not identify 1 = Happiness 2 = I encountered a definite being, or a voice clearly 2 = Incredible joy of mystical or unearthly origin

7. Did you feel a sense of harmony or unity with 15. Did you see deceased or religious spirits? the universe? 0 = No 0 = No 1 = I sensed their presence 1 = I felt no longer in conflict with nature 2 = I actually saw them 2 = I felt united or one with the world 16. Did you come to a border or point of no 8. Did you see, or feel surrounded by, a brilliant return? light? 0 = No 0 = No 1 = I came to a definite conscious decision to 1 = An unusually bright light ‘return’ to life 2 = A light clearly of mystical or other-worldly 2 = I came to a barrier that I was not permitted to origin cross; or was ‘sent back’ against my will. Near-Death Experience and Russian Theology 111

For an experience to classify as an NDE for research purposes, it must have a cumulative score of at least seven. The questions in the scale are cat- egorized into four components that address four kinds of NDEs: the cognitive NDE, the affective NDE, the paranormal NDE, and the transcendental NDE. These components aid clinicians; they help to differentiate and categorize the NDE for further analysis. It is possible that organic brain disorder, lack of oxygen, overabundance of carbon dioxide causecognitive and affective NDEs.12 Loss of blood could also explain the feeling of euphoria associated with affective NDEs.13 Causal factors for the NDE components are not universally agreed upon by psychologists and neuroscientists examining the NDE phenomena. Determining the type of NDE is useful for further investigation of the NDE phenomena. While cognitive NDEs are associated with time distortions, affective NDEs are associated with feelings of peace, joy and unity. Paranormal NDEs are associated with the phenomena of out-of-body experiences, and transcendental NDEs are associated with mystical encounters with God/deities/ spirits. The sixteen questions are organized with respect to the four types of NDEs: questions 1-4 address the cognitive component of NDEs, 5-8 address the affective component of NDEs, 9-12 address the paranormal component of NDEs, and 13-16 address the transcendental component of NDEs. Scores of five or higher within the cognitive component indicate that the NDE was a cognitive NDE. Scores of less than five in the cognitive component, but five or greater in the transcendental component indicate that the NDE is a transcendental type. An NDE is of the affective type if the cognitive and transcendental component scores are each less than five and the affective component score is five or higher. If the cognitive, transcendental, and affective component scores are each less than five and the paranormal component score is five or higher, then the NDE is a paranormal NDE. If no component is more than five, it is an unclassified NDE.14

12 Bruce Greyson, ‘Near-death encounters with and without near-death experiences: Comparative NDE Scale profiles’, Journal of Near-Death Studies, 8 (1990), pp. 151-161, on p. 152. 13 Cf. Kevin Nelson, The Spiritual Doorway in the Brain: A Neurologist’s Search for the God Experience (New York, 2011). 14 Bruce Greyson, ‘Altered States’ (see n. 11), pp. 369-375. 112 Walter N. Sisto

2. Bulgakov and his 1926 NDEs

With this metric in mind, let us now examine Bulgakov’s experiences. In The Sophiology of Death, Bulgakov recounts that his first experience occurred in January 1926. Although this text was published in 1939, this was not the first occasion that he wrote about the 1926 experience. He wrote about his experience in 1927 in his book Jacob’s Ladder. His 1926 experience is situated at the beginning of what is widely described as his ‘theological’ or ‘Paris period’, the last fifteen years of his life that he dedicated to explicating Russian Sophiology that resulted in two trilogies on Sophia and numerous other publications. On his January 1926 experience, Bulgakov writes that he was stricken with illness and fever on St. Seraphim’s day.15 When exactly his experience of death occurred is unclear. Bulgakov mentions that this crisis lasted from Saturday the tenth to Sunday the eleventh. In 1926, April and July were the only months where the tenth and eleventh fall on a Saturday and Sunday. In the Julian calendar, St. Seraphim’s day is celebrated on January 2. This would mean that if the experience occurred in 1926, his illness lasted three to six months. Another possibility is that he made a mistake with his dating. His experience occurred in January 1925. In 1925, the tenth and eleventh day of the month fall on a Saturday and Sunday during the month of Janu- ary. This would mean that his illness lasted for nine days. Bulgakov does not provide us with any indication that his experience lasted multiple months. However, he stresses that he loses track of time. He was in and out of consciousness during his illness. Yet, when Bulgakov speaks about the dating of the event he speaks of days, not weeks or months. Perhaps his illness began on St. Seraphim’s day (January 2, 1925).16 On the ‘third day’ after the start of the illness (January 5, 1925), his ‘temperature rose and I felt that I had

15 Incidentally, St. Seraphim of Sarov was not only one of the greatest Russian saints but an important saint with whom Bulgakov drew frequent inspiration for his theological work. 16 I am assuming that Bulgakov, who was Russian Orthodox priest and theologian, is referring to the Julian liturgical calendar. The Julian calendar has been the dominant liturgical calendar used by Russian Orthodox Christians for centuries. If he is using the Julian calendar, then St. Seraphim’s feast day fell on January 2nd. Near-Death Experience and Russian Theology 113 entered upon a grave and threatening illness’.17 ‘Day to day’ it rose until his death experience that happened from ‘Saturday the 10th to Sunday the 11th’ (January 10 and January 11, 1925).18 Making matters more complicated, Bulgakov presents this experience as one event, which spans for at least nine days. Because Bulgakov presents his dying experience as one event, I will evaluate it as such. Moreover, Bulgakov does not provide evidence that he was clinically dead at any point or docu- mentation that his illness was terminal – he was not concerned with docu- menting his death experience, but only with its theological and life-changing significance – Bulgakov refers to this experience as his death (smert’ ) experience. Based on our definition of what an NDE is, Bulgakov’s experience would qualify as an NDE, for it was a traumatic event in which he perceived that he experienced death. According to his account, his death experience began on January 2nd. Bulgakov experiences a burning pain when, suddenly, he writes, ‘[t]ime stood still … [and] I lived with such intensity and tension, with all the powers of my sinful and repenting soul that the minutes contained rays of light and eternity, God was there and I was before Him with my sin.’ Bulgakov experiences an alteration of time, which according to Jeffery Long’s Near-Death Experience Research Foundation (NDERF) is a common experience for NDErs.19 Moreover, Bulgakov writes:

[I] completely lost consciousness of the fact that my body, my sensory organ, was located on my bed, because for me it was floating about in other rooms and generally in space, and with difficulty I found a little part of myself in my immediate possession. Likewise floating about was the unity of my I because I sensed myself as some sort of we, a plurality, and in it my own proper I entered with difficulty into some sort of confused point.20

17 S.N. Bulgakov, Sophiology of Death, trans. Thomas Allan Smith (Grand Rapids, MI, 2017), p. 291 (manuscript); Please note that the page numbers of the translation that I use in this article correspond to the 1996 Russian publication of ‘Sofiologja smerti’. (Cf. Sergius Bulgakov, ‘Sofiologja smerti’, in Tikhiya Dumy (Moscow, 1996). 18 Ibid., pp. 291-292 19 Jeffery Long, Evidence of the Afterlife: The Science of Near-Death Experiences (New York, 2010), p. 13. 20 Bulgakov, Sophiology of Death (see n. 17), p. 291. 114 Walter N. Sisto

Bulgakov’s stress that his body was ‘floating in other rooms’ suggests that he experienced what researchers call an out-of-body experience. Bulgakov continues to describe another common NDE feature that affects approximately 22.5 percent of NDErs,21 the life review. He writes:

In a word, my I melted in the fever and became liquid and meltable. However, my spiritual I reached ever greater keenness and consciousness. It was the impar- tial judge of my life. I was in fear and trembling. It was like passing through the toll booths in which the smarting wounds of my soul came to light. But the Lord had mercy on me then and guarded me from demonic visions. [sic]22

Although Bulgakov does not specify what this review entailed, the fact that his ‘spiritual I’ judges his life suggests that it was a review of his life. Moreover, in this experience, Bulgakov explicates that he encountered God, ‘the Lord’ who spared him from his ‘demonic visions’. Perhaps this is a metaphor for the visions of his sinful choices. Nevertheless, his life-review was an intense purgative experience: he writes ‘[t]he feeling was: my sins were burned up, they exist no more’.23 Bulgakov’s portrayal of his life review comports to the majority of life review accounts that describe it as a painful but ultimately liberating and positive experience. He recounts that this ‘burning oven’24 experience was immediately fol- lowed by an overwhelmingly positive experience: ‘[a] guardian angel, who had been inseparably with me, lodged this for me in my heart. I suddenly felt that nothing separated me from the Lord, for I was redeemed by the Lord.’25 He continues that ‘I died and found myself beyond the limit of this world. In me everything shone with a special joy. The awareness appeared that all were equally alive and close, the living and the dead. I felt everyone with me spiritually.’ Bulgakov experiences harmony with all people, living and dead. He goes on to discuss the presence of God hovering around him as well as the ‘Most Pure Holy Mother of God’. This leads to the climax of his NDE:

21 Long, Evidence of the Afterlife (see n. 19), p. 12. 22 Bulgakov, Sophiology of Death (see n. 17), p. 291 23 Ibid., p. 292. 24 Ibid., p. 291. 25 Ibid., p. 292. Near-Death Experience and Russian Theology 115

Thereupon as if by some inner command, I moved forward, out of this world to that one – to God. I was borne with swiftness and freedom, deprived of any heaviness. I knew by some sort of trustworthy inner feeling that I had already passed through our time and the present generation, I passed the still following generation, and beyond it the end was already beginning to shine. Ineffable lights of the approach and presence of God began to burn, the light became all the brighter, joy the more ineffable: ‘it is not given to a human being to say.’ And at that time some kind of inner voice of a companion – I was alone, but together with some we, it was my Guardian Angel – told me that we had gone off too far forward and it was necessary to return to life. And I understood and heard with an inner sound that the Lord was returning me to life, that I was recovering.26

In this paragraph, Bulgakov details his experience of a bright light that he associates with God. Note that the experience of an encounter with a light is quite common within NDE research. This is the ‘light at the end of the tun- nel’ experience that has been popularized by contemporary media. Around 30 percent of NDErs experience this light. It is also interesting to note that Bulgakov refers to his meeting with his guardian angel for the second time. Now the angel prevents him from going ‘off too far forward’ or entering heaven, returning him to life.

3. Bulgakov’s NDE and the Greyson Scale

We turn now to the Greyson scale to evaluate whether or not Bulgakov’s death experience qualifies as a NDE and, if so, as what type of NDE. The first question of the Greyson scale asks if time sped up or slowed down during the experience. Bulgakov emphatically relates that ‘time stood still’ which scores a one in response to the question 1, as his description is indicative of a slowing down in time. Bulgakov mentions that he ‘passed through our time and the present generation, I passed the still following generation, and beyond it the end was already beginning to shine’.27 It is not clear whether or not this description constitutes the speeding up of thought that is ‘incredibly fast’ or that his thoughts ‘were faster than usual’. Thus, he scores zero in response to question 2. In passing, he writes that ‘I was in my beloved, native Crimea,

26 Ibid., pp. 292-293. 27 Ibid., p. 292. 116 Walter N. Sisto the summer of my son’s death in 1909 with its sunny rays’.28 This quotation indicates that a scene from his past returned to him; moreover, he encounters a life review, which shows that he experiences a variety of his life experiences again. There is no indication that he was able to control this experience. Bulgakov scores a two for question 3. Regarding question 4, he describes his experience as a ‘special joy’ whereby he ‘experienced everybody in him spiritually’. Although there is no indication that he understood everything (question 4), he repeats several times that this experience was a joyful and peaceful event. Thus, we may assign a score of one to question 4 but two to question 5 (i.e., he experienced a ‘special joy’), two to question 6, and two for question 7 (i.e., he describes his experience as being united with everyone). Based on the criteria above, Bulgakov’s experience was not simply a cognitive NDE; his score for questions 1 through question 4 is four, thus not meeting the five point requirement for the cognitive component. Nevertheless, Bulgakov describes his encounter with a light that he attributed to God; thus, we may assign a two to question 8 since he attributed a supernatural origin to the light. Bulgakov’s stress on the intensity of the experience suggests that it was more vivid than usual, but we are unable to ascertain the level of vividness. Therefore, it is appropriate to assign a score of one to question 9. However, Bulgakov suggests that he had an out-of-body experience: ‘I completely lost consciousness of the fact that my body, my sensory organ, was located on my bed, because for me it was floating about in other rooms and generally in space, and with difficulty I found a little part of myself in my immediate possession’,29 and then he sees those ‘by his side’. His brief description and the fact that it cannot be verified by Bulgakov require that we assign the score of one to question 10 and a two to question 12. Bulgakov writes that ‘the joy of the future age was opened slightly to me then’.30 How- ever, he seems to be reflecting on his experience of joy as opposed to a scene from the future. There is no clear indication that he experienced scenes of future events; therefore a zero should be assigned to question 11. With respect to questions 13 through 16, Bulgakov not only ‘clearly entered an unearthly realm’ (a score of two for question 13), but he encountered God, Mary, and

28 Ibid., p. 292. 29 Ibid., p. 291. 30 Ibid., p. 293. Near-Death Experience and Russian Theology 117 his guardian angel, who spoke to Bulgakov (two for questions 14 and 15). Bulgakov’s guardian angel does not permit him to move beyond what Dr. Greyson describes as ‘the border of no return’. Thus, Bulgakov scores a two for question 16 because he reaches the border but is not permitted by his guardian angel to go any further, for he believed God’s will was for him to return to his body. In total, Bulgakov’s experience on the Greyson scale scored 24. To qualify as an NDE, a score of seven or above is required. Bulgakov’s 1926 experience exceeds this threshold, and therefore according to the Greyson scale he had an NDE. To reiterate, within the cognitive component (questions 1-4) Bulgakov scored four, which indicates it was not a cognitive NDE. However, he scored six within the affective component (one point over the five-point threshold). For the paranormal component, Bulgakov scored four, and in the transcendental component he scored an eight. Based on the criteria mentioned above, Bulgakov’s NDE fits neatly into the transcendental component, as he scored below five in the cognitive component, but above five in the transcendental component. Because his score in the transcendental component was not less than five, his NDE was neither an affective nor a paranormal NDE. He experienced an intense, transcendental NDE.

4. 1939 Dying Experience

Bulgakov had a second near-death experience towards the end of his career in 1939. Whereas he calls his first experience an experience of death (smert’ ), his latter experience was one of dying (umiranie). He contrasts these two experiences to illustrate their difference. The 1926 experience was purgative, but ultimately it was a positive experience. He experiences Jesus Christ’s victory over death! On the other hand, his 1939 experience is one of defeat, to experience the pain and suffering related to our defeat in dying. In 1939, he experiences Christ’s defeat, the pain, loss of autonomy, and powerlessness of dying. Bulgakov recounts that in March of 1939 he was diagnosed with throat cancer.31 He would need two surgeries to remove the cancerous tumors from

31 Theologically, while his 1939 experience revealed the darkness of dying as God- abandonment, the 1926 experience revealed theophany of death. In 1926 he crossed the threshold of death and experienced the joy and liberation of death. 118 Walter N. Sisto his throat. Unfortunately, the prognosis was not favorable: there was a high- likelihood of death, and the best-case scenario was that he would live but lose his voice forever.32 He experiences the first miracle, as he did not have fear or sorrow, but rather a ‘joyful agitation in response to God’s summons’.33 For Bulgakov, this was surprising since he would have to undergo two surgeries without narcotic to dull the pain. The second surgery providentially occurred on Holy Tuesday, April 3, 1939 during Holy Week. That his experience of dying paralleled the celebration of Holy Week and the Triduum, the passion and death of Jesus Christ, was not lost on Bulgakov. His surgery made breathing agonizing and lasted for several days. Regarding the experience Bulgakov writes: ‘This was dying - with interruptions but without a ray of hope. I was submerged in some sort of darkness, with the loss of consciousness of space and time and only with a muddied memory that Holy Week was passing and that Good Friday and the Annunciation set in.’34 Yet, death did not come. Bulgakov experiences something akin to what Christian mystics refer to as a ‘Dark Night’ of the soul: complete abandonment of God. His abandonment seems directly related to the physical pain that prevented him from being able to form a prayer. Thus, he endures a general loss of his spirit’s power.35 In this moment of despair he experiences a ‘last miracle’. Nothing remained of him, but love:

I loved my brothers and I loved everyone. I turned over in my loving thought those I knew in the past, both beloved and not loved, those whom it was easy and happy for me to love, and those whom it was difficult to love. But I only loved, and everyone whom I remembered. I do not know if this was love in God. It seems to be so and is likely so – how else could I love?36

Bulgakov goes on to explain that he felt as if he was standing ‘face to face’ with God: to be so close to God was both terrible and thrilling. He experiences the fear of the Lord.37 But it was not joyful. Rather Bulgakov argues that this

32 Bulgakov, Sophiology of Death (see n. 17), p. 285. 33 Ibid., p. 285. 34 Ibid., p. 286. 35 Ibid., p. 287. 36 Ibid., p. 287. 37 Although Bulgakov makes no mention of the Christian spiritual life, it is of interest to note that what Bulgakov experiences, the experience of darkness, suffering, and the love is a common expression of the Christian spiritual life. The tradition is that the Dark Night Near-Death Experience and Russian Theology 119 was his entrance into the paschal mystery; he writes: ‘I died in Christ and Christ died with me and in me. Such was that terrible and staggering reve lation, which at the time I was not able to express in words or concepts and recognized only later.’38 This is an experience of co-suffering. Christ does not heal Bulgakov, but rather allows Bulgakov to participate in his death, and by the same token comforts Bulgakov insofar as Christ is dying with him. Bulgakov writes: ‘I was only able to love Him and to co-suffer with Him, in so far as He co-suffered with me.’39 Interestingly, although Bulgakov survives the surgery and is sent home to recuperate, he experiences depression; his ‘life remained joyless’.40 His ‘life was shrouded in gloom’ that was intensified by his muteness. Only after he receives news that his voice will return about three months after the experience began, does Bulgakov argue that his life returned and that ‘[t]he dying ended’.41

5. 1939 NDE and Greyson’s Scale

From the outset, applying Greyson’s scale to Bulgakov’s 1939 experience is challenging. One difficulty is that we are analyzing an experience of dying as opposed to an experience of death. In the 1926 experience it is clear that Bulgakov believes that he died, had an afterlife experience, and came back to life. His 1929 experience comports to a classic and popular NDE. However, in 1939 Bulgakov did not die, he writes: ‘[i]n dying I did not die and I did not recognize the light of death (as this had been given me earlier), but thus I remained in it for a certain, lengthy period of time, though not forever.’42 Moreover, Bulgakov does not only report what he experienced but also his theological explanation of that experience. For instance, he interprets his encounter with Christ as an encounter with Grünewald’s Christ.43 It is not clear if he speaking metaphorically or literally here. Finally, it is unclear when

prepares the mystics for union with God by burning away the mystic’s ego and self-deceit, to be filled with the love of God. Merton explains these points in chapter eighteen of his book, The Climate of Monastic Prayer (Thomas Merton, The Climate of Monastic Prayer (Collegeville, MN, 2018). 38 Bulgakov, Sophiology of Death (see n. 17), p. 287. 39 Ibid., p. 288. 40 Ibid., p. 290. 41 Ibid., p. 290. 42 Ibid., p. 288. 43 Ibid., p. 288. 120 Walter N. Sisto these experiences occurred. Bulgakov seems to be writing about multiple encounters over the course of several days. He treats it as one event because it transcended space and time. Let us turn now to Greyson’s Scale. Regarding the cognitive component of the Greyson scale (questions 1 through 4), Bulgakov scores a zero. His NDE was not a cognitive NDE. He made no mention of time speeding up (question 1), thoughts speeding up (question 2), past scenes returning (question 3), or understanding everything (question 4). Bulgakov stresses the joylessness of his ordeal. His joy returns after he received news that his voice would return to him. However, he does experience intense love, the love for Christ whom he ‘senses’ is co-suffering with him, but also an intense love for all people:

[I]t was some sort of last miracle in my suffering soul – love remained. I loved my brothers and I loved everyone. I turned over in my loving thought those I knew in the past, both beloved and not loved, those whom it was easy and happy for me to love, and those whom it was difficult to love. But I only loved, and everyone whom I remembered. I do not know if this was love in God. It seems to be so and is likely so – how else could I love? Of course, among those who stood around my bed some gladdened me, others less so, some consoled themselves, others grew fatigued, but no one could disturb the harmony of love which somehow broke through the dissonances of my fatal days.44

What is strange about this love is that it occurs while Bulgakov experiences the pain of dying, and it leads him ultimately to an existential knowing of the dying Christ. I included this long paragraph and this short reflection because the Greyson scale does not account for this unique experience. It is debatable whether or not Bulgakov would consider this love amidst the pain of dying ‘a feeling or peace or pleasantness’ (question 5) or ‘ a feeling of joy’ (question 6). Because this is not clear, I will error on the side of caution. The NDE scores zero for questions 5 and 6. Bulgakov made no mention of harmony with the universe (question 7), a bright light (question 8), more vivid senses (question 9) or ESP (question 10). He scores a zero for all four responses. There is no indication that future events came to Bulgakov (question 11), or that he had an out-of-body experience (question 12) and entered into an

44 Ibid., p. 287. Near-Death Experience and Russian Theology 121 unearthly realm (question 13). He also scores zero for questions 11 through 13. However, Bulgakov argues that he not only encounters God, but that ‘this proximity of God, standing before Him face to face, was thrilling’. Thus he scores a two for question 14. He also scores a two for question 15. Christ is the deceased spirit he encounters. Bulgakov writes at length about how he came to know Christ in his dying. It ‘was palpable, almost physical’. Bulgakov did not come to a border of no return (question 16); therefore he scores zero for question 16. Bulgakov’s 1939 experience scores five in total. His 1939 purported NDE is below seven; it does not meet the threshold to qualify as an NDE. Note that if we granted his experience of love was pleasant and joyful, earning a score of two for questions 5 and 6, his total score would be nine. Although his 1939 experience would now qualify as an NDE, it would be an unclassified NDE. No component score s higher than five.

6. NDE and Aftereffects

While Bulgakov’s 1939 experience was most likely not an NDE, his 1926 experience fits the pattern of transcendental NDEs and comports to many of the most common features of NDEs described in Long’s research. Interest- ingly, Long revealed that NDEs have ‘aftereffects’. The most significant after effect reported by ninety-one percent of NDErs in Long’s study was a change in attitude or reaffirmation of religious belief due to their NDE.45 It is interesting to note that if my theory is correct that Bulgakov’s 1926 NDE occurred in January of 1925, then it took place about five months before he arrived at L’Institut de Theologie Orthodoxe Saint-Serge, where he taught dogmatic theology and worked as dean.46 Bulgakov’s so-called Paris or theological period, beginning in 1925 and ending in 1939, was the most productive period for his theology and more specifically his Sophiology. It is possible that his myriad of theological publications during this decade was influenced or perhaps energized by his NDE.

45 Jeffery Long, ‘Media Sheet’, in Near Death Experience Research Foundation, April 12, 2017, http://www.nderf.org/NDERF/Media/Media%20WriteUp.htm. 46 Cf. Alexis Kniazeff, ‘Serving God and the Church’, in L’Institut de Théologie Orthodoxe Saint-Serge: 70 Ans de Théologie Orthodoxe A Paris (Paris, 1997), pp. 9-12, on p. 11. 122 Walter N. Sisto

However, to examine the full extent of the after effects of Bulgakov’s NDE on his career and theological writings would require a much larger independ- ent study that exceeds the scope of this article. We may make a few general observations that give good reason to believe that his NDE influenced a few publications. Like most NDErs, Bulgakov did not draw public attention to his experience or seek to be defined by it; however, this is an important experience that Bulgakov publishes on it in two separate publications: The Sophiology of Death (1940) and his book Jacob’s Ladder on Angels (1929). The latter text only examines his 1926 experience. The Sophiology of Death was an important text. Lilianna Kiejzik argues that it was a prepartory study on eschatology for his magnum opus, The Bride of the Lamb.47 It is clear that The Sophiology of Death was Bulgakov’s attempt to theologize the suffering and death of the Godman, Jesus Christ. In The Sophiology of Death, Bulgakov develops his theology of Christ’s death and suffering and the implication this theology has for a Sophiology of death with reference to his NDE. However, he fully fleshes out those implications in The Bride of the Lamb. The notion that the experience of death is positive because through death, we enter more fully into Christ’s death and resurrection is an important theme in his magnum opus, his book, The Bride of the Lamb. However, the clearest influence of his NDE on his thought is in his book Jacob’s Ladder on Angels (1929). In his introduction, Bulgakov cites his NDE as evidence that angels are present in our lives. His NDE serves as a basis for further analysis of his angelology examined in this book. However, it also explains Bulgakov’s Christian anthropology. His experience with his guardian angel reveals to him the interconnectedness of the human and angelic world. This revelation is supported by Church tradition and the Bible that demonstrate that angels are intermediaries between God and the world, who serve both God and humankind. (Cf. Hebrews 1:14) In Jacob’s Ladder, Bulgakov fleshes out the extent of the ministerial disposition of the angels. Bulgakov, basing himself in part on his own experience of an angel during his NDE, speaks about them as co-human, for they not only serve a particular human

47 Lilianna Kiejzik, ‘Sergei Bulgakov’s sophiology of death’, Studies in East European Thought, 62.1 (2010), pp. 55-62, on p. 56. Near-Death Experience and Russian Theology 123 person but share in the prototype or our ‘heavenly I’.48 Needless to say their ‘Heavenly I’ and our ‘creaturely I’ correspond and share the same logoi in Divine Sophia or God’s wisdom, but we are distinct hypostases.49 His point is that the guardian angels share our life in as much as they are inseparable from our prototype (or what God’s desires us to become) in God’s Wisdom. To use his language, angels are unique beings as they are purely hypostatic beings that are able to exist or hypostatize in our world or nature. 50 This leads Bulgakov into anthropology and a point that he will make later in the book that the interconnectedness we experience with angels is ultimately located in the fact that we are made after the image of God. God is a plurality of persons that exist in an eternal and continuous flow of ‘Trihypostatic love’.51 To be made after the image of God is to be made in the image of love. Analogically, human personality mirrors divine personality. Divine personality is perichoretic and self- giving personal love, and in the processions of the Son and Holy Spirit from the Father, each person goes outside of oneself to discover oneself in another person of the Trinity.52 These thoughts relate to angelology and Bulgakov’s encounter with his guardian angel during his NDE in as much as guardian angels are spiritual beings that are transparent for their human hypostasis. They exist for the human subject that they guard; it is a total and absolute commitment of love for God but also the person that they guard. Their relationship to us, or, more specifically, Bulgakov’s guardian angel’s relationship to him mirrors the relationship of the persons of the Trinity to one another.

48 Sergius Bulgakov, Jacob’s Ladder: On Angels, trans. Thomas Allan Smith (Grand Rapids, MI, 2010), p. 43. 49 Ibid., p. 43. 50 Ibid., p. 76. 51 He writes: ‘The hypostatic I in a human is the irreducible, absolute point of God- Likeness: the hypostatic creaturely I looks at itself in the hypostatic, trihypostatic image of Divinity, find itself firmly established within it’ (ibid., p. 2). Just as each divine person lovingly exist and goes out of itself to the two other divine persons, so too are human beings, who are made in this image of divine love, the Trinity, and called to embrace and live for one another lovingly. Human beings are called to sacrifice themselves for one another, much like how the Father sacrifices himself in love in the generation of the Son and the Son and Father sacrifice themselves in the spiration of the Holy Spirit. 52 This divine personal love is ultimately a quest for a ‘friend’ and a discovery of oneself in another (ibid., p. 4). For Bulgakov, to discover oneself, one must discover oneself in another person. 124 Walter N. Sisto

Bulgakov speculates that the nature of the guardianship of guardian angels is a type of ‘heavenly pedagogy’, a service in love for the human it has been assigned.53 It is a perichoretic-like expression of love, so to speak, as the angel must meet us where we are at and will not interfere with our free choice, overwhelming us with its angelic nature. In this way, Bulgakov’s angel accom- panied him during his NDE and ultimately led him back to life, as it was not yet his time to die. The interconnectedness of the guardian angel to the human hypostasis that is informed by his NDE experience is in my opinion nowhere more apparent in Bulgakov’s insistence that humankind is called to be ‘we’ or to share in the ‘human I’ (which he means to enter the subject) of one another. Recall that Bulgakov describes his NDE with his guardian angel as an experience of ‘we’ or ‘my other own I’; he writes ‘some kind of inner voice of a companion – I was alone, but together with some we, it was my Guardian Angel’. Moreover, the guardian angel not only prevents Bulgakov from being overwhelmed by the sufferings for his sin but also returns him to life. Note that this interaction with his guardian angel is intimate, and Bulgakov describes it as ‘the voice of a companion sounded within’.54 His NDE provides him with insight into the close relationship between humankind and angels. Bulgakov was an Orthodox theologian whose thought is nurtured by his lived experience. This should in no way devalue his theological genius as a systematican but rather provides further insight into his inclusive view of theology. While his 1939 experience would not qualify as an NDE, his 1926 experience fits the pattern of an NDE. According to the Greyson scale, his experience qualifies as a transcendental NDE. His experiences in 1939 and 1926 provide important insights into Bulgakov’s biography. Like many NDErs today, his NDE was an important event in his life. It not only con- firmed his faith in Christ and Orthodoxy, but also presented keen insights on Christian anthropology, angelology, and death that are tenets of his theological project. However, further research is needed to evaluate the extent to which his 1926 and 1939 experiences influenced his theological thought and career.

53 Ibid., p. 13. 54 Ibid., p. 19. Near-Death Experience and Russian Theology 125

Abstract

Any student of Sergius Bulgakov is aware that religious experiences play an important role in his theology. This essay examines his religious experiences in 1926 and 1939. Using recent research on near-death experiences, I argue that his 1926 experience comports to a transcendental near-death experience. His 1939 experience is at best an unclassified NDE. Moreover, like most near-death experiencers, Bulgakov’s near-death experience has aftereffects. Bulgakov’s 1926 experience helps him to refine his angelology. Even though his 1939 experience may not have been an near-death experience, it is an important event that aids his analysis of his Sophiology of death. Keywords: Bulgakov, near-death experience, Sophiology, angels, Russian theology