|
|
 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
anaitkes
USA
12 Posts |
 Posted - Sep 28 2009 : 9:10:17 PM
|
This is a very controversial topic which cannot so easily be swept under any rug. There are so many boards here so I wasn't sure where to post it but since the path of those who use entheogens is their own system of spiritual practice, I figured this would be somewhat appropriate.
A little history on my experience: been smoking marijuana off and on (mostly off) for about five years. Had the usual highs and experiences typical to marijuana experienced by all. One main characteristic of a marijuana high for me is that my thoughts speed up considerably and the no-mind of meditation is absolutely impossible for me to attain while high or stoned. On a few occasions however I experienced the spontaneous rise of some force which I later came to find is traditionally called Kundalini. This was experienced as an intensely bizarre sort of thing and it caused panic attack reactions each time and hyperventilation. No big deal, the experiences came and went and offered no lasting transformation so I forgot about them. The only other drug I've used, besides alcohol and tobacco a few times, is a dissociative called DXM. On this drug I experienced many visionary states comparable to what I've read about typical psychedelic experiences: ranging from closed eye visuals to fully immersive inner worlds or vast spaces, sometimes mystic visions. All sorts of things. Again, though, like marijuana, none of these had much positive effect on my life and I remained largely the same, just with some new experiences under my belt.
After going through a year of using both drugs heavily, with the intention of using them both as means to some desired spiritual end (in retrospect I'm not sure what it was, but I guess I felt that some wisdom or transcendental knowledge could be gained through those altered states), I also developed an interest in meditation after reading several encouraging books. Hooked on this idea, I decided to abstain from all intoxicants while I learned meditation. This I did and found that I had a deep love for the lucid, meditative sober state of mind rather than the intoxicated mind.
The sort of meditation that interested me was (is) related to the concept of Turiya. In the Mandukya Upanishad, our life experience is categorized into three 'realms': jagrat (external individual objectivity - worldly wakefulness), svapna (internal individual objectivity - worldly dreamfulness), susupti (internal individual objectivity without awareness thereof - worldly sleepfulness).
When I read about this three-fold distinction of the states I was charmed by the subtle importance of it on our understanding of ourselves and our experiences in life. If we are to know ourselves, to understand the mystery of our lives, where do we start? It seems to me that whoever began the movement of the drug-free, introspective meditation and yoga, began with the very fundamentals of our experiences. Before discussing philosophy or belief, what is our life comprised of? Being awake and doing things, being asleep and doing nothing. In between these two is dreaming. Sometimes in sleep we dream, sometimes we don't. When we wake up the senses again become active. When we go back to sleep they retire and the world of impressions in the mind becomes operative.
They seem to have studied this issue from the perspective of the witnessing consciousness that is present already at the basis of all perception and so on.
That witnessing subjective consciousness is the fourth state, turiya, beyond the other three. They come and go. It stays. Turiya is internal individual conscious subjectivity. When this state is accessed through meditation, the three other states are seen as separate from it. In meditation one may pass from jagrat to svapna to susupti while fully established in that witnessing state. In fact, I think the accepted definition of samadhi is generally the state which is when all those other states have dissolved.
This interested me on many levels. When I dream at night and have nightmares it's because I'm entirely given to the dream and I've lost the awareness of my subjective consciousness. Like a child wholly given to watching television. This is such foolishness, an innate ignorance of the mind! Now, due to practicing the continuity of center through meditation, I find myself able to retain awareness in dreams and, if I 'pull back' from the dream, it will dissolve and then only that pure witnessing I-consciousness shines in its own nature.
This is the basis of my interest in meditation. The main insight that flowers for me in meditation is that the self is beyond mind. To me, mind is a collection of information, memories, impressions, programmed patterns of thought, conditioned reactions, etc. All of that. The self as witnessing consciousness shines even when all that activity of mind stops. In meditation, when mind is stilled, all that remains is consciousness. The importance of this reveals itself when other areas of life are considered. If this self exists and can be experienced in such a way (devoid of the limitations imposed on it by mind, like dust on a mirror), then what does this say about those limitations? If I am normally bound by those conditioned patterns of mentation then, knowing the self, I am freed from them, free to use them as needed, but ultimately above them. We've fought wars over our identification with our own thought-forms!
With all that in mind ... I am still deeply confused over the issue of drugs vs. drugless meditation as means to the spiritual goal. I feel silly writing "the spiritual goal" because it's so vague as to be meaningless. If I have a goal, it exists in thought. So if my goal is moksa or whatever, it's in thought. That thought is conditioned by so many factors. Someone wants to be with Jesus in Heaven. Someone wants to attain non-dual realization. That wanting is in thought.
Nevertheless, the issue still stands. Generally my perspective on it is this : that human beings in their development probably used and developed cultures and religions centered on sacred plants and such long before they devised the refined systems of meditation and yoga. Take the author Patanjali for instance and his system of yoga - it's not a drug path. He mentions drugs in it, but clearly the entire thing is so far removed from entheogenic spirituality. Meditation, to me, means an insight that, since, like in a dream, the experiences of life are ephemeral and cause only the tug between extremes of happiness and unhappiness, one should seek the very source of one's existence. What is one's existence? Here we have the "I am not the body, I am not the mind, I am not the breath..." idea. Negating that which one is not until that which one is remains. In this process, we inevitably come to consciousness. Not consciousness of something but consciousness itself, which is the basis of the whole thing. Back to turiya. Drugs, shamanism, ecstatic states attained through chemicals and such, seem to me to still display that outward tendency. No doubt they produce internal experiences but from the perspective of the meditator centered in the witnessing consciousness, even the ecstatic visionary dreams in mind are considered external and objective.
Today I found a website which caused me much trouble throughout this day, and I have been left somewhat dismayed and mostly deeply confused on the issue. Here's the link: http://www.egodeath.com/MeditPopSpi...theogens.htm. I don't know who the author is but he presents a pro-drug, anti-meditation perspective on the whole thing. To him, meditation and its systems is a watered down "safe" version of the real breakthroughs that were being made through drugs. To him, meditation is useless and actually prevents the ecstatic state, and prevents enlightenment. His website is FILLED with arguments against meditation and for drugs. I would love for you all to read it and share your thoughts with me about it. He raises many good points in his biting assessment of New Age culture and yet ... I feel that meditation cannot be so easily dismissed.
I saw a video with Terrence McKenna speaking. Someone asked him if he thought meditation was useful. He said that "you don't hallucinate in meditation". Generally he seemed to have not had the experience I have had with it where the witnessing consciousness flashes in self-recognition, a penetrative sort of joy pervading, where there is no-mind in the ordinary sense of wandering in thought, dreaming, or drug experiences. Hallucinations seem like just another activity of mind when seen from the perspective of the witnessing consciousness. Do you think it's the case that these pro-drug writers are inexperienced with real meditative states (i.e., samadhi, etc) just as they accuse us of being inexperienced with the ecstatic, mystical drug states?
I'm sorry for the long post but I dearly hope someone will read it and shed their light on it or at least offer their thoughts. As mentioned, this has left me deeply confused and I do not want a cop-out answer or lie to myself on the issue.
|
|
|
Lacinato
USA
98 Posts |
Posted - Sep 29 2009 : 09:39:01 AM
|
My experience with those who depend on plants for their spiritual quest is that they don't know know much about meditation. Either they didn't stick with it, or perhaps they can't (being stuck to their substance use). The most troubling thing about it for me, is the dependence on something else, that may be masking some inner issues.
Yogani has spoken on this before--he says it may provide some initial inspiration, bhakti, for some. But other spiritual practices are needed to bring you home.
I'm sure your inner guru knows--you've alluded to it, already. What is your goal, why are you doing this, what are you doing? You don't need words to answer--there is a part inside that knows. Don't let yourself get away with pretending you do not know! What would you tell a friend in your exact situation? What makes sense when you don't impose your own will/thoughts/biases?
(I personally found them very helpful for a good kick in the pants. But for me, there was little danger of getting attached, because I don't enjoy any of these substances. It was consciousness research. And now I am over it, for the most part, because I know it won't bring me closer, but farther away).
quote:
Originally posted by anaitkes
This is a very controversial topic which cannot so easily be swept under any rug. There are so many boards here so I wasn't sure where to post it but since the path of those who use entheogens is their own system of spiritual practice, I figured this would be somewhat appropriate.
A little history on my experience: been smoking marijuana off and on (mostly off) for about five years. Had the usual highs and experiences typical to marijuana experienced by all. One main characteristic of a marijuana high for me is that my thoughts speed up considerably and the no-mind of meditation is absolutely impossible for me to attain while high or stoned. On a few occasions however I experienced the spontaneous rise of some force which I later came to find is traditionally called Kundalini. This was experienced as an intensely bizarre sort of thing and it caused panic attack reactions each time and hyperventilation. No big deal, the experiences came and went and offered no lasting transformation so I forgot about them. The only other drug I've used, besides alcohol and tobacco a few times, is a dissociative called DXM. On this drug I experienced many visionary states comparable to what I've read about typical psychedelic experiences: ranging from closed eye visuals to fully immersive inner worlds or vast spaces, sometimes mystic visions. All sorts of things. Again, though, like marijuana, none of these had much positive effect on my life and I remained largely the same, just with some new experiences under my belt.
After going through a year of using both drugs heavily, with the intention of using them both as means to some desired spiritual end (in retrospect I'm not sure what it was, but I guess I felt that some wisdom or transcendental knowledge could be gained through those altered states), I also developed an interest in meditation after reading several encouraging books. Hooked on this idea, I decided to abstain from all intoxicants while I learned meditation. This I did and found that I had a deep love for the lucid, meditative sober state of mind rather than the intoxicated mind.
The sort of meditation that interested me was (is) related to the concept of Turiya. In the Mandukya Upanishad, our life experience is categorized into three 'realms': jagrat (external individual objectivity - worldly wakefulness), svapna (internal individual objectivity - worldly dreamfulness), susupti (internal individual objectivity without awareness thereof - worldly sleepfulness).
When I read about this three-fold distinction of the states I was charmed by the subtle importance of it on our understanding of ourselves and our experiences in life. If we are to know ourselves, to understand the mystery of our lives, where do we start? It seems to me that whoever began the movement of the drug-free, introspective meditation and yoga, began with the very fundamentals of our experiences. Before discussing philosophy or belief, what is our life comprised of? Being awake and doing things, being asleep and doing nothing. In between these two is dreaming. Sometimes in sleep we dream, sometimes we don't. When we wake up the senses again become active. When we go back to sleep they retire and the world of impressions in the mind becomes operative.
They seem to have studied this issue from the perspective of the witnessing consciousness that is present already at the basis of all perception and so on.
That witnessing subjective consciousness is the fourth state, turiya, beyond the other three. They come and go. It stays. Turiya is internal individual conscious subjectivity. When this state is accessed through meditation, the three other states are seen as separate from it. In meditation one may pass from jagrat to svapna to susupti while fully established in that witnessing state. In fact, I think the accepted definition of samadhi is generally the state which is when all those other states have dissolved.
This interested me on many levels. When I dream at night and have nightmares it's because I'm entirely given to the dream and I've lost the awareness of my subjective consciousness. Like a child wholly given to watching television. This is such foolishness, an innate ignorance of the mind! Now, due to practicing the continuity of center through meditation, I find myself able to retain awareness in dreams and, if I 'pull back' from the dream, it will dissolve and then only that pure witnessing I-consciousness shines in its own nature.
This is the basis of my interest in meditation. The main insight that flowers for me in meditation is that the self is beyond mind. To me, mind is a collection of information, memories, impressions, programmed patterns of thought, conditioned reactions, etc. All of that. The self as witnessing consciousness shines even when all that activity of mind stops. In meditation, when mind is stilled, all that remains is consciousness. The importance of this reveals itself when other areas of life are considered. If this self exists and can be experienced in such a way (devoid of the limitations imposed on it by mind, like dust on a mirror), then what does this say about those limitations? If I am normally bound by those conditioned patterns of mentation then, knowing the self, I am freed from them, free to use them as needed, but ultimately above them. We've fought wars over our identification with our own thought-forms!
With all that in mind ... I am still deeply confused over the issue of drugs vs. drugless meditation as means to the spiritual goal. I feel silly writing "the spiritual goal" because it's so vague as to be meaningless. If I have a goal, it exists in thought. So if my goal is moksa or whatever, it's in thought. That thought is conditioned by so many factors. Someone wants to be with Jesus in Heaven. Someone wants to attain non-dual realization. That wanting is in thought.
Nevertheless, the issue still stands. Generally my perspective on it is this : that human beings in their development probably used and developed cultures and religions centered on sacred plants and such long before they devised the refined systems of meditation and yoga. Take the author Patanjali for instance and his system of yoga - it's not a drug path. He mentions drugs in it, but clearly the entire thing is so far removed from entheogenic spirituality. Meditation, to me, means an insight that, since, like in a dream, the experiences of life are ephemeral and cause only the tug between extremes of happiness and unhappiness, one should seek the very source of one's existence. What is one's existence? Here we have the "I am not the body, I am not the mind, I am not the breath..." idea. Negating that which one is not until that which one is remains. In this process, we inevitably come to consciousness. Not consciousness of something but consciousness itself, which is the basis of the whole thing. Back to turiya. Drugs, shamanism, ecstatic states attained through chemicals and such, seem to me to still display that outward tendency. No doubt they produce internal experiences but from the perspective of the meditator centered in the witnessing consciousness, even the ecstatic visionary dreams in mind are considered external and objective.
Today I found a website which caused me much trouble throughout this day, and I have been left somewhat dismayed and mostly deeply confused on the issue. Here's the link: http://www.egodeath.com/MeditPopSpi...theogens.htm. I don't know who the author is but he presents a pro-drug, anti-meditation perspective on the whole thing. To him, meditation and its systems is a watered down "safe" version of the real breakthroughs that were being made through drugs. To him, meditation is useless and actually prevents the ecstatic state, and prevents enlightenment. His website is FILLED with arguments against meditation and for drugs. I would love for you all to read it and share your thoughts with me about it. He raises many good points in his biting assessment of New Age culture and yet ... I feel that meditation cannot be so easily dismissed.
I saw a video with Terrence McKenna speaking. Someone asked him if he thought meditation was useful. He said that "you don't hallucinate in meditation". Generally he seemed to have not had the experience I have had with it where the witnessing consciousness flashes in self-recognition, a penetrative sort of joy pervading, where there is no-mind in the ordinary sense of wandering in thought, dreaming, or drug experiences. Hallucinations seem like just another activity of mind when seen from the perspective of the witnessing consciousness. Do you think it's the case that these pro-drug writers are inexperienced with real meditative states (i.e., samadhi, etc) just as they accuse us of being inexperienced with the ecstatic, mystical drug states?
I'm sorry for the long post but I dearly hope someone will read it and shed their light on it or at least offer their thoughts. As mentioned, this has left me deeply confused and I do not want a cop-out answer or lie to myself on the issue.
|
 |
|
|
anaitkes
USA
12 Posts |
Posted - Oct 09 2009 : 4:19:18 PM
|
If I wasn't before, I'm now absolutely convinced of the total uselessness of drugs for meditation. Yes, I am now boldly going to say that even the 'glimpses' one experiences with the combination are totally useless. In fact, glimpses is not the right word at all and it conveys a false meaning. To have a glimpse gives the impression of seeing it as it is, if but for only a moment. Like climbing a mountain and seeing from the peak down below, if only for a moment. This is not the case with drugs at all and I am afraid that anyone who thinks the opposite is deluded and should put in all their efforts to destroy this delusion.
Last night I had what I hope and pray to be my last drug experience. I won't name the drug specifically but let me just say that it is one of many which enable the experient 'access' into their own mind. What I mean by this, although its meaning should be clear to those who have used such drugs, is that one such drugs, although one can usually maintain awareness of activity of and in the external world, it is much easier to close one's eyes and 'go within' whereupon the internal world is revealed. In this state, it seems that one has accessed a space which, although always theoretically available, is nevertheless simply not there (at least, in full) when one is sober, unless tremendous effort is made in meditation (but anyone who has not experienced the meditative states through whichever means will not be aware of this).
When I determined that the drug had taken full effect, that it was no longer the rocket trying to break free of earth's gravity, but we had safely made it into space, I closed my eyes (meaning here that I shut off all activity of the senses in their external movement and withdrew them within) and simply remained a witness. Hopefully you know what I mean - whatever meditation techniques you use, ultimately they can bring you to one point, and that is the state of simply abiding as the witnessing consciousness, the central I-point within. I did this, as I do whenever I can at all other times, and waited. Here, the drug was no longer effecting external perceptions as it would have had I maintained activity in the external world of the senses, but it played about in the mind.
I experienced all the sensations of 'shrinking' and 'expanding', as if being contracted to an atomic point and then expanded to a vast ocean in size, etc. I experienced the thoughtless state easily, in fact during the whole thing there was little if any mundane inner narrative in motion. When I would periodically open my eyes I noted the same sensation as returning from sober meditation - my external perceptions seem wavy. I attribute this just to the immense relaxation of allowing those senses some rest. And the familiar sensations of post-meditation, re amusement that such a seemingly boundless inner space could be confined within this small body and this clunky world we live in, etc.
During these experiences I felt like a Buddha. The popular image of the historical Buddha being an otherworldly fellow who, upon closing his eyes, retires into boundless timeless nirvana, seemed to be my experience. At this point I deliberately thought about the important question of 're-entry' - i.e., how to ground a psychedelic experience so that it and its insights are not lost when the drug naturally wears off. I considered that this has been perhaps the main problem of the School of Drugs and its Philosophers and Mystics. Certainly you are aware that these people are their own philosophical school? It is true. Just as we read of the many off-sects of various yogic traditions, so are the modern and ancient and future drug gurus and their followers their own system. Instead of pure living and yoga they have pills.
Back to my point - 're-entry' or grounding the experience. This appeared to me at that moment as an enormous issue. Perhaps if these experiences could be retained then there would be no problem, right? Everyone could take the drug, be guided through the sessions so they don't waste it playing with their new and novel perceptual changes or drifting aimlessly through a cesspool of their own memories, re-assessing their lives but not getting anywhere important. And then if the experience could be grounded, and upon re-entry into earth's atmosphere (drug wearing off, re-entry into the natural functioning of the organism and mind), they retain their knowledge and findings and can stabilize their realizations, then we'd have an enlightened world easily.
I have not read much on this subject of grounding, so I thought of the possibilities. A few hours had passed and I knew it would not be long before the engines turned off and I began falling back. "How could it be done?" I very seriously contemplated. "I have just experienced something - that simply by closing my eyes I abide in the self, beyond limited thought-forms, beyond the egoic illusion, beyond the body idea, etc., and it seems so simple: so how can I make it last?"
During that time, that is, when my senses came back to me and I was not wholly overwhelmed by the drug and my own self-willed immersion into self, I thought deeply over my sober meditation experiences. "This," I thought, "is not the turiya state".
Although I was certainly centered in that central witnessing consciousness while on the drug, I was still in the waking state, although it was an altered or perhaps perverted formation of it due to the chemical impact on the body and mind. In sober meditation, there is a very distinct jump and shift from one state to the next. It is said, and I also understand it as such although much definition is needed otherwise it is often misunderstood, that in the process of yoga, the initial object of contemplation is the waking state, and the continual flow of thought on that object of contemplation is the dreaming state, and the point where both object and limited subject resolve into the deeper state of oneness is the deep sleep state. From my experience I think that in that process, the deep sleep state is a sort of unconscious samadhi - not fully realized turiya state. In that state, the fullness and depth of that central I-consciousness is right there, but it is not fully realized because one's awareness is given to the object of contemplation, even if it be voidness. It is a sudden flash or pulsation, a recognition of that central consciousness, that happens here if awareness is not lost and given to slumber, that I define as the first stage of the turiya state. Here, there is not only the absence of external perceptions such as the world and the body, but there is the absence of thought (and therefore fantasy, imagination, dreaming, and egoity) and there prevails a throbbing, ecstatic recognition and realization of the self, like rivers merging with the ocean and pulsating in bliss. This state is entered with a sudden and not subtle shift, like a lighter being flicked on and the flame sustained.
Now, to compare that experience, which I came to know through devoted and intense meditation on void, to the drug experience, is very interesting. The drug altered my mind and even before entering within I was not thinking in my usual manner. Everything was changed. How could I possibly judge correctly, making a proper and informed distinction between states, if the mind had been altered by a drug? In the meditation on the drug, the state felt very deep - but was it? It certainly inspired lots of grandiose thoughts after it. I felt larger than life. In the meditation I experienced what I suppose to be the beloved ego-death of the School of Drugs and what their Philosophers and Mystics speak of, at least inasmuch as the state of the egoic contraction was absent in the experience, and there supervened the consciousness of self., and yet when the drug began to fade, the thought crept in that I had been dreaming. We could say that the peak of the drug experience, which is when all the oft-discussed experiences happen (obviously due to the overwhelming of the chemical on the nervous system, at its strongest point), is like the state of consciousness during the ordinary sleep-dream state when one is entirely given to the dream without any awareness as to it being unreal and a mind-made illusion. Many, many drugs produce this effect - and often in such short doses (like DMT and Salvia) that they stun the experient due to experiencing a complex dreamworld in but a few mundane minutes, and it becomes more and more difficult to NOT believe that one had experienced ________ in reality, rather than in mind alone. This growing feeling, that it had all been a dream, impressed me greatly and appeared to me as a very good observation that demonstrated the vast differences between Drugs and Meditation.
To expound on this point - when I return from ordinary meditation, the LAST thing on my mind is that "that was a dream". In fact, the witnessing state when accessed through meditation seems more real than all the years I lived unaware of it, living in the external world only. My first taste of turiya revitalized my life, gave me an entirely new perspective of understanding about myself and the world at large. This is the most significant difference that I find between the experiences. A discerning mind on returning from the peak of the drug state should be able to see where awareness was lost and given wholly to the peak experience of the drug, and where it has returned in the form of a discriminating intellect and objective mind. And no one can disagree on this point, that the drug comes on, reaches its peak, and then fades. It is like a chemical rollercoaster that you're forced to ride. It slowly builds up and then races down, does some loops, then reaches the highest point, the thrilling peak, and then once again comes down. When you get off the ride, you're dizzy, excited, but you're back on solid ground and where you started from. Meditation on the other hand, yoga in general, the process of it, is more of a merging from gross to subtle to subtlest, as they traditionally put it. It's not a wild rild, it's not a rollercoaster. It's like sinking into the depths of the ocean, away from the surface ripples, and bringing back a vast awareness of that peace, stillness and awareness.
I have more that I could say about this issue if anyone is interested. I hope this post has been of benefit to your understanding and my advice for all is to stay on the path of sober meditation and yoga and avoid the experimentation with drugs. At best, they can remind you of the path and perhaps shed light on how much deeper your meditation already is. At worse, and it's much worse, they can bind you to their experiences and delude you into chasing mirages until your mind is ruined, your meditation is ruined, your body is weakened, and your life is empty. But in the end I think we undergo the experiences we need to undergo in order to develop our understanding. These experiences, good and bad, may all be necessary, despite their sometimes devastating setbacks.
|
|
|
|
YogaIsLife
641 Posts |
Posted - Oct 13 2009 : 07:52:12 AM
|
| Great posts, questions, and - eventually -, answers from experimentation anaitkes! I have benefited from your posts and find your descriptions and honesty of investigation in what relates to the experiences you have of great value. They, in some ways, reiterate my own experiences/perceptions and, on the other hand, inspire me to look deeper and ever more clearly at the nature of my own reality and my own conscioussness through investigation via meditation and daily living. For that I thank you. |
|
|
|
Victor
USA
910 Posts |
Posted - Oct 24 2009 : 5:59:15 PM
|
| OK, I read that website and it seems like alot of manic repetitive babbling to me. Just arguing over and over again how entheogens are authentic and that meditation is a cheap ineffective imitation. This argument is just silly to me and the need for balance is very clear in the author of those posts. On the other hand, I do believe in the legitimacy of entheogens and possibly their primal origins of these experiences. The point being that it seems absurd to me that entheogens should be in competition with meditation as a spiritual practice. Meditation is a systematic practice of developing silence and refinement of the nervous system which is balancing and grounding and a path inward. This is a daily habit much like bathing, brushing your teeth. It is like your daily job. Entheogens are more like a dramatic vacation to a foreign land that can transform your perspective. Nothing wrong with that and it can be very beneficial or possibly hazardous but I for one would have no interest in doing that daily. Why do you think it is called a "trip"? The idea of a rivalry would be absurd in a sane society. The problem is that since these substances are illegal that many people who had either been involved in the subculture who used them departed in fear of scare tactics and potential consequences and adopted the rationale that meditation (which is culturally acceptable) was somehow superior. We are really comparing apples and oranges here. The sad thing is how few people are really trained in the intelligent use of these powerful substances and how many unprepared kids are experimenting without decent guidance. The good thing about the meditation traditions is that guidance is available and there is no paranoia about "getting caught". The is absolutely no conflict between these two approaches in my mind other than the tendency of people who use entheogens frequently to have irregular practice habits which can be counterproductive, particularly in the case of practices such as pranayama. Another concern might be that if one begins to open very powerful energies through yoga practice that an entheogen experience might be more overwhelming than it might be in an ordinary person. On the other hand a yogi might have fewer energy blocks so it might be smoother. I guess its a very personal thing, but I am reminded of a friend who used to make a joke about someone that he had known who kept arguing the question YOGA OR MEDITATION? It made me laugh until I realized that some people took that seriously.... |
Edited by - Victor on Oct 24 2009 6:02:13 PM |
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Oct 24 2009 : 7:35:14 PM
|
Hi Anaitkes,
I just saw this post; I would have responded sooner if I'd seen it sooner.
quote:
Originally posted by anaitkes
Do you think it's the case that these pro-drug writers are inexperienced with real meditative states (i.e., samadhi, etc) just as they accuse us of being inexperienced with the ecstatic, mystical drug states?
Yes.
Obviously, this varies from person to person, but in general, my answer is an emphatic *Yes*.
Statements such as:
"Entheogens *won't* save the world and won't teach people to be ethical, but they do have a far higher potential for leading to enlightenment and mystic experiencing than meditation, drumming, hyperventilation, contemplation, or chanting, and the latter methods should be considered "alternative" or "augmentation" of the "main" and "normal" method, which is entheogens.
Entheogens are more reliable, universally effective, and intense, to the extent that we can say that sitting meditation is practically a way of avoiding, not attaining, religious experiencing."
(as posted on EgoDeath.com)
... are false.
Such statements indicate that their author has extremely limited experience with yoga, samadhi and more comprehensive experiencing of consciousness (than is possible via entheogen use).
The strongest drugs can't even begin to mimic infinite reality.
That's not a statement against entheogens per se; it's just that the two approaches and their results simply can't be reasonably compared.
It's kind of like comparing the Ganges river with a cartoon of a river; I mean, sure, they're both rivers ..... 
Ram Dass (as Dr. Richard Alpert) was one of only two professors (the other being Dr. Timothy Leary) to be fired from Harvard University during the entire 20th century (for extensive LSD experimentation and promotion); they co-wrote The Psychedelic Experience , the entheogen-centric version of The Tibetan Book of the Dead.
Suffice it to say: Ram Dass has some serious entheogenic "street-cred". 
Which is interesting, since he hasn't done entheogens in a very long time (decades).
Why?
Two reasons:
1. Samadhi, being reality, is an infinitely more powerful and more extensive "high" than entheogens can give (which isn't exactly accurate; more like non-samadhi is an artificial *low*/very bad dream ).
2. Drugs wear off.
Yoga - Union, is real; Yoga is who we each and all actually are, now.
In the beautiful documentary on his life and path, Fierce Grace, Ram Dass describes how his guru, Neem Karoli Baba, helped him to see that freedom from the cycling is possible; that freedom beyond imagination is reality; the peace is the true nature of the self; that no artificial states are needed; wholeness is inherently real; wholeness is who we are, now.
Neem Karoli Baba spoke the truth.
And how did that shifting away from focus on entheogens work out for Ram Dass?
Watch the video linked above.
quote:
I'm sorry for the long post but I dearly hope someone will read it and shed their light on it or at least offer their thoughts. As mentioned, this has left me deeply confused and I do not want a cop-out answer or lie to myself on the issue.
Your confusion is understandable, but ultimately, you can clear it up on your own, in fairly short order, via consistent daily practices.
Trying to figure things out never yields the answers you need, anyway; the answer isn't something you get - there isn't a right one, or a wrong one, or even a questioner who "gets" the answer .... you *are* the answer you're seeking.
It's ("entheogens vs. meditation") even simple from an "empirical evidence" standpoint:
Many, many thousands of people, at minimum (no one knows any kind of exact number) have become enlightened, throughout history, and all over the world, by engaging in non-entheogenically based spiritual practices.
No one, as far as I know, has ever become enlightened because of entheogens.
It's pretty much impossible, unless all the entheogenic experiences finally culminate in a flash of insight: "Ah, I see; experiences have nothing at all to do with this!"
And are entheogenic experiences more likely to result in that insight than any other experiences?
Probably not; they're probably *less* likely, because the idea of separate self is drawn to that which it finds entertaining or interesting ... and thus keeps itself bound to the idea of itself as a self having experiences.
Ultimately, your own experiencing will clear up any confusion; in the meantime, if you'll notice: enlightened and credible teachers never (as far as I know) say that entheogens are truly needed, and most offer a certain amount of warning in connection with their use.
The deepest reason for the warnings have nothing to do with "drugs being bad" .... but simply that the thinking behind entheogenic use usually involves egoic conditioning being strongly at play (the idea that there's something to "gain", or something "special" in the experiences, or that experiences are somehow connected with enlightenment).
There's nothing entheogens can give you that yogic practices and inquiry can't and won't give you infinitely more greatly.
And "give", as used above is one of those problematic limitations of language; ultimately, nothing is "given" ..... it's all and only about release.
And please note, by the way: I'm not "anti-entheogen" in any way; they simply have nothing at all to do with realizing your true nature; no experience does ... and they (entheogens) have the added disadvantage of creating the illusion of something special or powerful in the realms of objectivity/experience .... where true nature is specifically *not*.
If someone wants to use entheogens, I truly have no opinion or judgment on the matter; I'm just stating that they're not necessary for enlightenment, and have nothing to do with enlightenment.
If anyone feels drawn to their use for whatever their own reasons are, that's of course 100% up to them.
A lot of the confusion, whether it's about entheogens, or comparing different paths, or whatever .... has to do with limited mind trying to understand the unlimited .... which is always, infinitely beyond ability to understand; that's why it's called unlimited.
Enlightenment can never be understood.
Enlightenment can only be living unbound, now.
Enlightenment is real.
Enlightenment is all that's real.
Enlightenment is who you are.
You're seeking God with God's eyes.
None of it is about "finding" ......... it's all about letting go and being clear that your true nature is what is always and ever looking from.
Stop looking ...... and gently step back ..... little more ...... little more ........
...... and before very long at all ..... no one will need to tell you anything, ever again.
Enlightenment is real, my friends; c'mon Home ..... it's who/where you ever are, anyway.
Wholeheartedly,
Kirtanman |
Edited by - Kirtanman on Oct 24 2009 9:00:35 PM |
|
|
|
Lacinato
USA
98 Posts |
Posted - Oct 24 2009 : 10:24:35 PM
|
Very interesting video on Ram Dass. I watched all three parts--great! I feel the same way. I have certainly learned things from entheogens. And the biggest thing I learned the last time I took them, is that the experiences are a distraction at this point. The point for me was to get a glimpse of the possibilities out there. It was appropriate for that brief time (especially since I don't tend to like any sort of altering substance, I don't tend towards addictiveness). Time to move onto practices for the long haul.
Thanks, Kirtanman!
|
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Oct 26 2009 : 9:42:06 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lacinato
Very interesting video on Ram Dass. I watched all three parts--great! I feel the same way. I have certainly learned things from entheogens. And the biggest thing I learne
d the last time I took them, is that the experiences are a distraction at this point. The point for me was to get a glimpse of the possibilities out there. It was appropriate for that brief time (especially since I don't tend to like any sort of altering substance, I don't tend towards addictiveness). Time to move onto practices for the long haul.
Thanks, Kirtanman!
You're welcome!
I reached the same conclusion ... along with the fact that the "objective only" (even if it feels subjective to the thinking-me) nature of the experiences are actually very limited, in comparison to what's possible once awareness unifies.
Entheogenic experiences can be quite amazing in comparison to (so-called) "normal consciousness" .... but that's a very poor comparison.
A hundred dollar monopoly bill is worth more than a five dollar monopoly bill .... but neither of them compare on quite the same level as an infinite supply of actual money.
Unless of course you're playing monopoly, and perfectly happy doing so.
It's weird, though (in an infinitely cool way) ... I'm sitting here listening to Jason Mraz (I'm Yours), munching french fries, am kinda tired .... have a slight toothache .... and am simply freely and completely enjoying the utter perfection of this moment as the best experience possible ... ever.
So far.
It's all about the awareness and the experiencing, now ... not the content, or (as in the past) the veiling of the content with thinking.
Reality blows away every high.
FAR beyond the ability of words to describe.
|
|
|
|
Holy
796 Posts |
Posted - Oct 30 2009 : 8:10:31 PM
|
The main problem lies in the functioning of the brain and nervous system, the chakras and so on. Any substance can activate the whole system for a period of time. And as anaitkes found out very honestly, this enlightened state wants to be stabilized physically that it lasts and stays. That's the whole difference between long time stimulation of the nerves, brain and chakras (daily practies) versus short time stimultion via substances.
And those that cause the brain to function the same way is limited to some sorts like 5meo-dmt-stuff, magic shrooms, lsa/lsd and partially mescaline.
And there are accounts of siddhas in the himalayas who used kaya kalpa to reach lasting self realization. But it is kept secret till today as humanities understanding on this topic, the relation between absolute and relative expression within time space ( brain, nervous system etc.), is still a complete mystery on a scientific level. Even those who enter samadhi don't get it completely and even if they get it completely, they can't translate and express it completely after coming back.
Accounts of timetravels on astral planes, underground information about alien technology etc show at least the possibility, that sciences will sooner or later be able to bring someone directly via technology to an experience of nonduality and will perhaps be able to even enhance and transform the brain and nerval system of a human body to a stable and lasting degree to hold this functioning level.
At least at this moment in time/space for most of the people the only lasting way to stay as the self needs some kind of practice. In future times, all this will surely be a little different and much more easier in every aspect.
Some words like "awareness-technology" comes in my mind. |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
| AYP Public Forum |
© Contributing Authors (opinions and advice belong to the respective authors) |
|
|
|
|
Ethneogens vs Meditation
