Drugs and spirituality

[I, Brian]

We are all no doubt are various hallucinogenics have traditional use in various cultures, but I'd like to ask a particular and pertinent question:

Can spritual experiences through drug use be regarded as objectively real?

The importance of this question is that I'd like to pursue issues of physical reductionism against the conscious experience.

Simply put: because we know that hallucinagenics physically affect the brain, then can spiritual experiences from use of hallucinagenics really make claim to be an exploration of anything truly beyond the self?

The root of this question is the relationship between our physical bodies, consciousness, and the "reality" of the spiritual experience.

A discussion point.

[Marsh]

Originally Posted by I, Brian

Can spritual experiences through drug use be regarded as objectively real?

Quote (Tommy Chong): One time I played Black Sabbath at 78 speed, man.

Quote (Cheech Marin): And then what happened?

Quote (Tommy Chong): I saw God!

What exactly do you mean by spiritual experiences, Brian? Do you mean 'visions' (by this I actually mean visual or audio)? Do you mean revelation, like you 'receive' an idea that you think you never could have thought of on your own? Or is it both? Or neither?

I'm asking because, depending on the precise nature of your question, I will have different answers.

[louis]

Originally Posted by I, Brian

We are all no doubt are various hallucinogenics have traditional use in various cultures, but I'd like to ask a particular and pertinent question:

Can spritual experiences through drug use be regarded as objectively real?

The importance of this question is that I'd like to pursue issues of physical reductionism against the conscious experience.

Simply put: because we know that hallucinagenics physically affect the brain, then can spiritual experiences from use of hallucinagenics really make claim to be an exploration of anything truly beyond the self?

The root of this question is the relationship between our physical bodies, consciousness, and the "reality" of the spiritual experience.

A discussion point.

From Louis...
An ineresting point - one thing I've noticed about
religeous belief is its resemblence to a drug.
It's a form of DEPENDENCY - people say they NEED it -
can't function without it - experience panic when they
first try to go without it.
It ALTERS PERCEPTION - causes people to feel BETTER
when things around them are really getting WORSE.
It acts as a PLACEBO - aleviates pain by fooling the
brain into releasing natural sedatives. ( Or the opposite -
as in VOODOO - it CAUSES pain by fooling the brain into
a psycho-somatic reaction as the victim sees the DOLL
being damaged )

It's used

[samabudhi]

An ineresting point - one thing I've noticed about
religeous belief is its resemblence to a drug.
It's a form of DEPENDENCY - people say they NEED it -
can't function without it - experience panic when they
first try to go without it.
It ALTERS PERCEPTION - causes people to feel BETTER
when things around them are really getting WORSE.
It acts as a PLACEBO - aleviates pain by fooling the
brain into releasing natural sedatives. ( Or the opposite -
as in VOODOO - it CAUSES pain by fooling the brain into
a psycho-somatic reaction as the victim sees the DOLL
being damaged )

Now replace food for drugs and your paragraph still stands.

I must remind those that are not familiar with Hallucinogenic drugs that they are in a different class to alcohol, narcotic analgesics (heroin), stimulant euphoriants (cocaine, amphetamines) and a few others.
Their effects are not physiologically addictive and are only as psychologically addictive as anything one would want to do again, is. Who doesn't want to feel good. But don't be fooled. They're not all sun and beach.

Can spritual experiences through drug use be regarded as objectively real?

I'm sure you've seen the Matrix, so I'll repeat what Morpheus asked Neo: 'What is real?'
What one observes on a hallucinogenic trip is made of the same stuff that ordinary perception is. It's just interpreted differently.
Remember that it is not the senses that are effected by hallucinogenic drugs, it is the mind, the interpreter of the information. However the mind chooses to interpret the information, we can not argue with. What would we say, that the realisations it comes up with, although rarely expressible, are unreal? The realisations that arise during a trip are so far from normal experience, that we don't have the language, nor the structure of the brain to cope with them.

What do we do in early life. We program the brain to act in certain ways. To accept information and dish it out in an orderly fashion. It is not able to cope with the realisations the brain reaches when tripping. It's like a CPU sending back bytes of information to memory that are 10bits long instead of the usual 8bits. What is memory supposed to do with this information? It is built for 8bit bytes. Does it mean that the information is junk? No. It just means we can't express it or store it meaningfully. We have serious trouble trying to integrate this information into the brain that we have developed. This is why LSD users often get depressed after tripping because they feel like they're in a straight jacket, unable to share their experience with others or understand what has just happened to them.

Simply put: because we know that hallucinagenics physically affect the brain, then can spiritual experiences from use of hallucinagenics really make claim to be an exploration of anything truly beyond the self?

If I understand you correctly, you're saying that because drugs physically effect the brain, the realisations we experience are not from somewhere/one else, such as God, but can only be from ourselves.
What about prayer then. Why would prayer be anything different. It all happens in our head. The same with meditation. The most important question is where does the self end. Define this and you have your answer.

Objectively real. This is the problem. There is no objective standpoint. It's all just a matter of probability. All things are impermanent. The Buddha taught this. Therefore nothing can be known for sure. How do you know the self is real, because it is conscious of experience. Then how do you know experience is real, because it is perceived by the self. There is no high without low. There is no big without small. Everything is relative.

[louis]

What one observes on a hallucinogenic trip is made of the same stuff that ordinary perception is.

From Louis...
Fascinating stuff to in which to poke around ... !
I've read that it was a common practice in primitive times
for a "holy man" to wander about in some wilderness area,
going without sleep until he began to HALLUCINATE.
He would then assume that his hallucinations were
MAGICAL VISIONS coming from somewhere OUTSIDE his own mind. Maybe because he did not understand things
like "the subconscious" or the fact that our brains record
EVERYTHING we ever see or hear - but we consciously access only about five percent of it. We ALL know far more
than we THINK we know and under some conditions,
such as when the Bhudda took a nap, a bit more of it makes its way to a conscious level.

[louis]

I'm sure you've seen the Matrix, so I'll repeat what Morpheus asked Neo: 'What is real?'

From Louis...
Yes, I've seen it and both its sequels ( saw part 3
at the Imax theatre just down the road from where
I live - still not as good as part 1 )
Another old movie plot seems even more appropriate :
The one about an investigator who goes undercover
as an inmate at an asylum. After awhile, he's no longer
sure who's really crazy - them or him. That's how I
feel after listening to someone trying to recruit me
into a church - that happens to me a LOT !
But so far, I THINK I've managed to maintain my "sanity".
P.S. Sorry for my mistake - he wasn't "the Bhudda" until
AFTER he woke up ...

[samabudhi]

Fascinating stuff to in which to poke around ... !

(hee hee) That's why people do it. There's nothing more interesting than watching your own brain at work, and nothing more revealing.
I recently figured out a good way of describing some of the visual distortions one sees when tripping on Psilocybe mushrooms. I was rollerblading the other day, and going for about 30 minutes non-stop. Then I stopped and everything looked like it was pulling away from me. Well that's what mushrooms look like, except some things pull and some things push. Just had to share that with you.

The one about an investigator who goes undercover
as an inmate at an asylum.

Yip. That's on my 'to do' list for sure.
You know, Jung did a similar thing. He actually tried to cause himself to suffer from disorders which he cured, in order to understand them better, and find more effective treatment.

Originally Posted by louis

P.S. Sorry for my mistake - he wasn't "the Bhudda" until
AFTER he woke up ...

Kay, but it's spelt Buddha.
I can't stress how deep the first movie was. I can't speak for the others. In my opinion, half the reason it did so well was because it had something profound to say...that actually makes sense and that we haven't heard before (in the west anyway.)

[mcedgy]

I,Brian
Drugs and Spirituality: Hallucinations seem to be an encouraged tradition in most religions. Fasting for forty days and nights as in Matthew chapter 4 could cause hallucinations just as surely as Native Americans smoking peyote or a shaman blowing some funky dust up one’s nose or sharing the smoke from some wacky weed. Apparently many cultures accept religiously inspired ritual hallucinations as truly spiritual. McEdgy

[samabudhi]

It is thought that the infamous Saint Anthony, who lived in the deserts of the Sinai peninsular, ate bread which was infected by the ergot fungus (the source of LSD.) Hallucinatory drugs were everywhere, before they became illegal.

[louis]

Kay, but it's spelt Buddha.

From Louis...
Thanks for the correction - I've never practised
any religion so my knowledge of such things
is very limited. Any help is appreciated.

[I, Brian]

But back to the original question - how much worth can we put on drugs providing spiritual insight, which comes from without the self? Or do such drugs only present an exploration of the human psyche only?

[Shih Yo Chi]

I've always thought that the term "hallucinogen" was inappropriate. The effects vary, but one of the most prominent effects they can have is removing the structure that you have given existence. We all have developed a structure that we view the universe through, things that we believe can happen, or exist, and things we don't accept in our world. If that structure is temporarily removed, it is possible to experience things that we could not otherwise since we don’t believe they are impossible.

Sometimes spiritual insights are blocked by our belief system and such experiences can help remove those blocks. I think that the hallucinogenic experience would not provide insight, but could sometimes provide an aid to overcoming our own resistance to the experience of spiritual awareness.

The only exploration of “Beyond the self” would come from accepting and exploring things that were there all the time, but removed from consciousness by our belief system.

I want to be clear that I don’t condone the use of such drugs. They can be very dangerous and there are much safer ways to obtain the same experience.

[samabudhi]

Originally Posted by Shih Yo Chi

I've always thought that the term "hallucinogen" was inappropriate.

Mind-altering is too general. Psychotomimetic is too limiting. Psychedelic is better. Psyche (mind) delic (clear, visible).

You can find the following quote at -
http://www.psychedelic-library.org/dreams2.htm

At first Huxley proposed the word phanerothyme, which derived from roots relating to "spirit" or "soul." A letter to Osmond included the following couplet:
To make this trivial world sublime,
Take half a Gramme of phanerothyme.

To which Osmond responded:
To fathom hell or soar angelic
Just take a pinch of psychedelic.

And so it came to pass that the word psychedelic was coined.

Sometimes spiritual insights are blocked by our belief system and such experiences can help remove those blocks. I think that the hallucinogenic experience would not provide insight, but could sometimes provide an aid to overcoming our own resistance to the experience of spiritual awareness.

I do believe it provides insight, but that insight is so fundamental, it's difficult to integrate in back into normal life, let alone remember.

I want to be clear that I don’t condone the use of such drugs. They can be very dangerous and there are much safer ways to obtain the same experience.

I have not yet had an experience which comes anywhere near those that I have had on psychedelics. Approach with caution and humility though.

[Marsh]

Here's the thing: Drugs kill brain cells. You need brain cells to think and, in my opinion, thinking is the beginning of spirituality. Therefore, drugs by definition hinder spirituality in the long term.

I agree that in the short term certain drug-related experiences can be eye-opening-- to a degree. For example, by altering your perception drugs also alter your personal narrow-mindedness (I believe that we are all narrow-minded to various extents), which allows you to look at things in a new direction. Nevertheless, in order for those new ideas and possibilities to ever amount to anything, you need to be able to think.

I don't know if any of you has ever hung out around someone who's done drugs for more than 20 years of their life, but I have. Words like sharp and clear don't really describe the long-term effects on the mind.

I would posit that a much better path would be to exercise one's mind by reading, having conversations, and writing in a diary or a journal, rather than to try and take a "spiritual short-cut" by following in Jim Morrison's footsteps.

[samabudhi]

Drugs kill brain cells.

Massive generalisation. What's your definition of drug? Panado's a drug.

You need brain cells to think and, in my opinion, thinking is the beginning of spirituality.

Kay, so I don't have 20years to my name, but I have yet to see any depreciation of my intellect.

I don't know if any of you has ever hung out around someone who's done drugs for more than 20 years of their life, but I have. Words like sharp and clear don't really describe the long-term effects on the mind.

I hang out with people who've been doing Marijuana for variable lengths of time, and yes, the results are not pleasent to the intellectually inclined, such as myself. I don't condone the prolonged use of Marijuana.

I would posit that a much better path would be to exercise one's mind by reading, having conversations, and writing in a diary or a journal, rather than to try and take a "spiritual short-cut" by following in Jim Morrison's footsteps.

This is the thing. People won't accept Psychedelics because it's just too easy. Let me explain that Psychedelics are not easy at all. They're very difficult actually. They take a lot of getting use to and a lot of understanding and I'm glad I've taken the time to get to know them.

The biggest problem with peoples' perceptions of Psychedelics and Visionary herbs is when they are ignorant of their nature and clump them together with drugs such as opioids, cocaine, amphetamines, barbituates, solvents, alcohol, nicotine and marijuana (which is a slight psychedelic along with it's other analgesic effects.)
Psychedelics are in a field of their own and should be treated as such.
Pure psychedelics (LSD, Mescaline, Mushrooms) have no known long lasting effects on one's body. Peoples ideas about things may change, sure, but there is no conclusive evidence against them from years of use by modern and ancient cultures. I won't go into the real reason why governments are perpetually on their case. You can look it up if you want. If you haven't done any research of your own, then remember that probably all you've ever heard about drugs is what the government has told you.

The problem with psychedelics is that the realisations and thoughts they throw at you are difficult to stomach. You end up thinking about all your anxieties and buried sub-conscious thoughts. This along with the possibility of ego-death on a deep trip, and the whole thing becomes a bit much. This is why people use marijuana in conjunction with psychedelics, so that they can enjoy themselves. This is a mistake, because anything you learn on the trip is shrowded in confusion because marijuana slows down your brain.
Marijuana is the cause of the fuzzy looking drug 'addict'. It is an analgesic (a pain killer,) like heroin. It is different to the psychedelics I'm talking about.

Please do not prejudice against psychedelics without adequate research.
An excellent and unprejudiced site where you can find all the information you want about most drugs can be found at this link: http://www.erowid.org