Throughout the beginning of time, people have been fascinated with and pondering the subject of what happens after death. Even if science can provide light on the physical changes that take place after death, the issue of what happens to consciousness, the soul, or the afterlife is still a matter of personal faith and belief. According to science, the body experiences a number of physical changes after dying that ultimately result in decomposition. Due to the loss of adenosine triphosphate (ATP) and the accumulation of lactic acid in the muscles, the body experiences a period of muscle stiffness known as rigour mortis immediately after death. Algor mortis is the term for the drop in body temperature that occurs along with a drop in blood pressure, cessation of breathing, and heartbeat.The body starts to decompose over time as microbes and enzymes breakdown the tissues and organs. The body will eventually resurface on Earth and join the regular cycle of life.
Yet, the question of what happens to consciousness or the soul after death is outside the purview of science and is instead a matter of faith and personal conviction. Many theories and scenarios about what happens after death are offered by religious and cultural beliefs. Death is viewed in many cultures as a change from one state of being to another. Hinduism, for instance, views death as the beginning of a new life in which the soul is reborn into a new body in accordance with the rule of karma. In Buddhism, passing away and the soul moving on to another realm or being reincarnated are both considered as opportunities to achieve enlightenment.In Christianity, heaven and hell are frequently portrayed as two options, with people who have led moral lives rising to heaven and those who have lived sinful lives descending to hell. Islam holds the idea of heaven and hell, with the soul being judged according to its actions during life.
Various faiths and spiritual traditions put forth various theories regarding what happens after death. For instance, death is viewed as a return to the Earth in Native American belief, with the spirit fusing once more with the natural world. Many African cultures view life after death as continuing in the afterlife, where the ancestors are revered and celebrated. Outside religion and spirituality, there are a variety of afterlife theories and beliefs. Some people think that the soul can reincarnate into a new body and live on Earth or in another realm. Some people hold the view that there is an afterlife and that the soul travels to either heaven, hell, or a region in between.
There are also many who think there is no afterlife and that the soul simply stops existing after death. This perspective, which sees the universe as a purely physical reality without any spiritual or paranormal components, is sometimes linked to atheism and scientific materialism. There are many different theories and beliefs concerning what happens after death, but it is impossible to know for certain what awaits us there. Although while some people claim to have had near-death experiences or seen the afterlife, these reports are frequently speculative and subject to interpretation.
In the end, there will always be unanswered questions about what happens after we die that cannot be fully answered by science or any other method. Death is a normal part of the cycle of life and something that we will all eventually experience, whether we believe in an afterlife, reincarnation, or simply the loss of awareness.
About the Creator
pavithran gt
I AM BASICALLY STORY WIRTER. I WROTE THRILLER STORIES.
Reader insights
Outstanding
Excellent work. Looking forward to reading more!
Top insight
Easy to read and follow
Well-structured & engaging content
Keep reading
More stories from pavithran gt and writers in FYI and other communities.
Who Introduced the Biryani ??
The renowned South Asian dish known as biryani has gained worldwide acclaim. It is a rice-based cuisine that was first created in the Indian subcontinent, more specifically in the states of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh. It has gained popularity among foodies and expanded across the globe over time. A rich, fragrant dish called biryani is made by combining a variety of spices, meats, and veggies. It is ideal for any occasion.The Persian word "birian," which meaning "fried before cooking," is the source of the English word "biryani." Before adding them to the rice, the meat or veggies are fried in this manner. Long-grain rice, such as basmati rice, plus a number of spices, like as cumin, cardamom, cinnamon, and cloves, are often used to make biryani. The meal may also contain saffron, mint, coriander, and other herbs, depending on the location.There are numerous varieties of biryani, each with a distinctive flavour and way of preparation. Hyderabadi biryani, Lucknowi biryani, Kolkatai biryani, and Sindhi biryani are a few of the most well-liked varieties. Each of these variants has a distinctive flavour character thanks to the special combination of spices and ingredients that go into it.For instance, Hyderabadi biryani is renowned for its use of herbs and spices like mint, saffron, and turmeric. It is often stacked with rice and fried onions and cooked with goat meat. Contrarily, Lucknow biryani is often cooked with chicken or lamb and is prepared with a mixture of spices including cinnamon, cardamom, and bay leaves. The traditional ingredients for Kolkata biryani, which is an Indian dish that originated in Kolkata, are potatoes, boiled eggs, and beef (fried onions).The Sindhi people of Pakistan make Sindhi biryani, a regional dish that is often made with beef or mutton with layers of potatoes, onions, and tomatoes. Also, the meal is renowned for the use of dried plums and green chilies, which give it a distinct tangy flavor.
By pavithran gt3 years ago in FYI
A Failed Artist, A Disillusioned Poet, An Underpaid Game Show Host
I took my son and niece to Gori, a small town in Georgia where Joseph Stalin was born. They talked me into visiting the Stalin's Museum, the largest in the post-Soviet space. I had resisted going there because I just can't stand the monster and know enough about him, or so I thought.
By Lana V Lynx19 days ago in FYI
Minister Told Armoured Vehicle Which Left Soldiers Vomiting Was ‘Safe’
A growing controversy has erupted after revelations that a government minister was assured an armoured military vehicle was “safe”, despite reports that soldiers using it later suffered severe nausea, dizziness, and vomiting. The incident has sparked serious questions about military oversight, equipment testing, and whether frontline troops are being adequately protected by those responsible for their safety. As details continue to emerge, the issue has become a flashpoint in debates over accountability within defence procurement and soldier welfare. What Happened Inside the Vehicle According to reports, the armoured vehicle was deployed during routine military operations and training exercises. Soon after extended use, multiple soldiers began experiencing intense physical reactions, including vomiting, headaches, and disorientation. Medical evaluations suggested that the symptoms were consistent with poor ventilation, exposure to fumes, or mechanical issues inside the vehicle’s sealed environment. In armoured vehicles designed to protect occupants from external threats, airflow and internal safety systems are critical—and failures can quickly become dangerous. Despite these warning signs, the vehicle had reportedly been cleared for use following assurances provided to senior officials. Ministerial Assurance Under Scrutiny At the heart of the controversy is the claim that a minister responsible for defence matters was told the vehicle posed no safety risk. This assurance reportedly influenced the decision to continue deployment without immediate suspension or further investigation. Critics argue that this raises troubling questions: Were safety reports properly reviewed? Were soldiers’ complaints taken seriously? Did bureaucratic pressure outweigh on-the-ground realities? Opposition figures and military advocates have called for transparency, demanding to know who approved the vehicle, what data was used to declare it safe, and whether warnings were ignored. The Human Cost for Soldiers For serving personnel, the issue goes beyond politics. Soldiers trust that the equipment they are issued has been thoroughly tested and meets strict safety standards. When that trust is shaken, morale and confidence suffer. Several affected soldiers reportedly required medical attention, and some expressed frustration that their symptoms were initially dismissed as minor or unrelated. Military families and veterans’ groups have voiced anger, saying that troops already accept enormous risks—and avoidable equipment failures should never be one of them. Procurement and Testing Concerns The incident has reignited long-standing concerns over defence procurement processes. Modern military vehicles are complex systems, often developed through private contractors and approved through layers of bureaucracy. Experts note that problems can arise when: Testing conditions do not reflect real-world use Feedback from soldiers is delayed or filtered Cost or deadlines take priority over safety If early warning signs were overlooked in this case, it could indicate a broader systemic issue rather than an isolated error. Official Response and Calls for Investigation Following public backlash, officials have stated that the issue is being reviewed and that soldier safety remains a top priority. Some authorities have pledged to examine ventilation systems, internal sensors, and maintenance records for the vehicle. However, critics argue that internal reviews are not enough. There are growing calls for an independent investigation to determine: Whether the “safe” assessment was accurate Who provided the assurance to the minister Whether protocols were followed Without clear answers, confidence in military leadership risks further erosion. A Broader Debate on Accountability This incident highlights a recurring tension in defence policy: the gap between decision-makers and those directly affected by their decisions. When assurances made at high levels conflict with lived experiences on the ground, accountability becomes essential. Transparency advocates argue that admitting mistakes is not a weakness—but failing to address them is. For many observers, the key question is not just whether the vehicle was unsafe, but how warnings were handled once problems emerged. Conclusion: Safety Should Never Be Assumed The controversy surrounding the armoured vehicle serves as a stark reminder that safety cannot be declared—it must be proven, continuously tested, and reassessed. Soldiers rely on trust: trust in their equipment, their leadership, and the systems designed to protect them. When that trust is compromised, restoring it requires honesty, accountability, and meaningful reform. As investigations unfold, the outcome will likely shape future defence decisions and determine whether lessons are truly learned—or repeated.
By Fiaz Ahmed 3 days ago in FYI
Comments
There are no comments for this story
Be the first to respond and start the conversation.