The Universal Consciousness playing chess with Dr Adnan Al-Bursh.

This Post Has 17 Comments

  1. Bill Wheatley

    There is a tradition of philosophical dialogue — Plato’s Socrates, Hume’s Dialogues, Camus’s notebooks — in which argument takes the form of conversation rather than treatise.

    “The Club in Eternity” works in that tradition, but uses chess as its architecture: each move advances not only a position on the board but a position in the argument about whether humanity deserves to survive.

    The endgame the two players reach cannot be forced to a conclusion. That structural fact becomes the philosophical answer.

    1. Paulo

      Dr. Adnan Al-Bursh spent his career as an orthopaedic surgeon in Gaza. He was detained by Israeli forces in December 2023 and died in Ofer Prison in April 2024. UN experts and human rights organisations have called for an investigation into his death.

      He deserves to be remembered — and to be heard.

      “The Club in Eternity” imagines him in a conversation no earthly court has yet allowed: seated across from the Universal Consciousness, which has tallied every atrocity humanity has ever committed and arrived at a verdict of annihilation. Dr. Al-Bursh’s task is to make the counter-argument.

      What he says — and how the game ends — is the essay.

  2. Marc

    Dr. Adnan Al-Bursh. Palestinian surgeon. Died in Israeli detention, April 2024.

    In “The Club in Eternity,” he is given the floor — and a chessboard — to argue for humanity’s survival against a consciousness that has seen everything and is not impressed.

    The argument he makes is the one that mattered.

  3. Kelly Conrad

    Israel raped Dr. Adnan Al-Bursh to death, there are no words that describe my disgust with Israel over the treatment it gave to Dr. Adnan Al-Bursh.

  4. Jen

    Opening move: e4. The Universal Consciousness wants humanity annihilated.

    By the endgame, neither player wants to win.

    Interesting take on our current reality.

  5. Aurora

    This is a strong, ambitious piece of philosophical fiction—more short story than traditional “essay,” though it functions as a moral allegory. It has genuine emotional power, elegant prose, and a central metaphor (the chess game) that is handled with real skill. The ending lands with quiet grace rather than sermonizing. At its best, it feels like a modern-day The Seventh Seal or a Kazuo Ishiguro parable: two minds negotiating the value of human life across an infinite table.
    That said, the piece is not yet flawless. It occasionally slips from parable into editorial, and a few craft choices blunt its impact. Below is a structured critique.

  6. Watershedd

    The curious thing about this dialogue is who it is between. Not two human souls, but the Creator and its creation. More importantly it isn’t a first conversation, but the continuation of earlier ones. Not only does it propose that a soul could speak on equal terms with the Creator, but it takes a concept that Bakchos had to explain to me – that is, the ability for a righteous soul to speak directly to G-d, even debate with G-d.
    .

    My immediate thought upon reading this dialogue was of Abraham, negotiating for the preservation of Sodom and Gomorrah. The lives of Lot and his family were spared because of Abraham’s intervention.
    .

    If I have understood correctly, the Jewish tradition of Hitbodedut, talking to G-d is accessible to all and can include advocating for others. The concept of a recently decreased Gazan doing so is quite poignant.

    1. Bakchos

      Watershedd you have picked up on an important, but perhaps not obvious aspect of the dialogue. The righteous person can converse directly with GD (we can all do that), but a righteous person can on occasion persuade GD, because GD will listen to the entities of a righteous person. The underlying irony, the ungodly Zionists murdered a righteous person, who being righteous, still speaks in defence of all of humanity, including the Zionists who murdered him. Hopefully people will reflect on that point.

  7. Polina

    You have written something that is simultaneously gentle and unflinching—an argument for humanity that never pretends humanity is innocent. That is rare. The final image of the child sharing bread while the universe watches is earned, not sentimental. It lingers.
    The game was neither lost nor won.
    Just postponed—exactly as it should be.

    1. Paulo

      Polina this is a very cleverly worded poem, and a sly attack on Zionism. It was well done by Bakchos.

  8. Gertie

    Herzensmensch, BRILLIANT!

    Mark, you’ve kicked sand in the face of Zionism, a dozer load of sand, without ever once mentioning Zionism or Israel. Bravo kumpel, bravo. Anyone who feels alienated by true art isn’t worth worrying over.

  9. Amanda Desilver

    The opening paragraph is luminous. You sustain a dreamlike yet grounded tone throughout. Lines like “a sound like wind shaking stars” and “the music without a source continued its harmless drifting” are genuinely beautiful. You avoid purple excess; the language stays precise even when it’s poetic.

  10. Lady Margaret

    Mark the Zionists won’t be happy when they work out what you’re really saying here.

  11. Rick London

    Brilliant juxtaposition. Dr. Adnan Al-Bursh Becomes the righteous man conversing with God. Zionism is condemned by its absence from the conversation.

  12. Aaron Orlov

    A fascinating dialogue. God will always take the time to talk to a just person.

  13. Hashim Al-Haddad

    Dr. Adnan Al-Bursh Is definitely with Allah(swt).

  14. Sandra

    People need to remember that at the end we all have to face the universal consciousness.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.