Psychedelics

[Isle of View]

1 hour ago, Henri said:

Anyway, the topic drugs, psychedelics, Ayahuasca and whatever is already a lot discussed on this site. To my opinion it`s in a way ruining this site when it`s discussed next to the real spiritual stuff. It`s like a site which is devoted to the newest cars and people are throwing posts of their newest bikes on it. So @Leo Gura maybe a good suggestion to make a separate chapter on the drugs stuff to keep it away from real and more important posts?

I agree with Henri.

Using drugs is not self-actualization. It's an induced state. 

Good analogy with the plane and hang-glider. 

@Leo Gura it would be great if you consider to make a separate rubric for the psychedelics.

Kind regards, 
Chris

Edited April 17, 2016 by Isle of View

[Naviy]

On 12.04.2016 at 8:41 PM, DreamSpirit said:

I'm going to Peru to work with Ayahuasca...it's not necessarily in the drug category because it's a healing plant, but it's the most potent psychadelic on the planet.  I can't wait to experience it tho.  Im' really feeling called to it.  Has anyone ever heard of it?

I've been interested in DMT and Ayahuasca for like 5 years now. I am planning to visit Peru for a week of Ayahuasca rituals too. I believe that this could become the most (and probably the only) important thing that happened and will happen to me in this life. Do not have the money currently (it costs about $3000, which is like $6000 in my country right now because of the recent currency changes). Also, it is a very radical move, so I need to gather courage too   

[ChimpBrain]

@henri for such an openminded site you're expressing an extremely closed minded point of view. Cultures worldwide have been using various psychedelics as tools to attain higher states of consciousness for thousands of years. It's "well known" that more people are harmed by the dark side of psychedelics than are helped by them? Are you just making things up now lol? We're all "so ignorant"? You're sounding awfully dogmatic, man.

In the end, the goal is to reach the goal, not so suffer as much as possible on the path. We should all be free to experiment with any tool that can help us break through plateaus or speed up the process and decide for ourselves if they're helpful or not. They have been for a great number of people after all.

[Henri]

Krishnamurti on drugs

Why should one not take drugs?

Questioner: Why should one not take drugs? You apparently seem to be against it. Your own prominent friends have taken them, have written books about them, encouraged others to take them, and they have experienced with great intensity the beauty of a simple flower. We, too, have taken them and we would like to know why you seem to be opposed to these chemical experiences. After all, our whole physical organism is a biochemical process, and adding to it an extra chemical may give us an experience which may be an approximation to the real. You yourself have not taken drugs, have you? So how can you, without experimenting condemn them?

Krishnamurti: No, we have not taken drugs. Must one get drunk to know what sobriety is? Must one make oneself ill to find out what health is? As there are several things involved in taking drugs, let us go into the whole question with care. What is the necessity of taking drugs at all - drugs that promise a psychedelic expansion of the mind, great visions and intensity? Apparently one takes them because one's own perceptions are dull. Clarity is dimmed and one's life is rather shallow, mediocre and meaningless; one takes them to go beyond this mediocrity. The intellectuals have made of the drugs a new way of life. One sees throughout the world the discord, the neurotic compulsions, the conflicts, the aching misery of life. One is aware of the aggressiveness of man, his brutality, his utter selfishness, which no religion, no law, no social morality has been able to tame. There is so much anarchy in man - and such scientific capacities. This imbalance brings about havoc in the world. The unbridgable gap between advanced technology and the cruelty of man is producing great chaos and misery. This is obvious. So the intellectual, who has played with various theories - Vedanta, Zen, Communist ideals, and so on - having found no way out of man's predicament, is now turning to the golden drug that will bring about dynamic sanity and harmony. The discovery of this golden drug - the complete answer to everything - is expected of the scientist and probably he will produce it. And the authors and the intellectuals will advocate it to stop all wars, as yesterday they advocated Communism or Fascism. But the mind, with its extraordinary capacities for scientific discoveries and their implementation, is still petty, narrow and bigoted, and will surely continue, will it not, in its pettiness? You may have a tremendous and explosive experience through one of these drugs, but will the deep-rooted aggression, bestiality and sorrow of man disappear? If these drugs can solve the intricate and complex problems of relationship, then there is nothing more to be said, for then relationship, the demand for truth, the ending of sorrow, are all a very superficial affair to be resolved by taking a pinch of the new golden drug. <BR? Surely this is a false approach, isn't it? It is said that these drugs give an experience approximating to reality therefore they give hope and encouragement. But the shadow is not the real; the symbol is never the fact. As is observed throughout the world, the symbol is worshipped and not the truth. So isn't it a phoney assertion to say that the result of these drugs is near the truth? No dynamic golden pill is ever going to solve our human problems. They can be solved only by bringing about a radical revolution in the mind and the heart of man. This demands hard, constant work, seeing and listening, and thus being highly sensitive. The highest form of sensitivity is the highest intelligence, and no drug ever invented by man will give this intelligence. Without this intelligence there is no love; and love is relationship. Without this love there is no dynamic balance in man. This love cannot be given - by the priests or their gods, by the philosophers, or by the golden drug. 

http://www.mensjournal.com/magazine/the-dark-side-of-ayahuasca-20130215

http://riverbankoftruth.com/2014/06/17/the-extreme-danger-of-ayahuasca-by-greg-calise/

One of the most recurring myths about ayahuasca has to do with the presence of DMT in the brain. According to this theory –popularized by Richard Strassman in his book ‘The Spirit Molecule’–, a gland secretes DMT in the fetus and in the exact moment we die, as well as during REM sleep. However, this evocative metaphor is challenged by science:

“We are aware that there is DMT in our nervous system but these are hardly traces and there is no evidence that this substance is involved in any mental process; likewise, in our body there are 40 other tryptamines,” says neuroscientist José Carlos Bouso. “The hypothesis of DMT as‘The Spirit Molecule’ is just that: a pure hypothesis, as Strassman himself has later acknowledged, although it has been taken as axiomatic by many people”.

 

 

 

[Henri]

Great discussion here...

Given 5 warning points for verbally abusing the moderator...

Can somebody give me some insights here, because I am totally unaware.

[Isle of View]

1 hour ago, Henri said:

One of the most recurring myths about ayahuasca has to do with the presence of DMT in the brain. According to this theory –popularized by Richard Strassman in his book ‘The Spirit Molecule’–, a gland secretes DMT in the fetus and in the exact moment we die, as well as during REM sleep. However, this evocative metaphor is challenged by science:

“We are aware that there is DMT in our nervous system but these are hardly traces and there is no evidence that this substance is involved in any mental process; likewise, in our body there are 40 other tryptamines,” says neuroscientist José Carlos Bouso. “The hypothesis of DMT as‘The Spirit Molecule’ is just that: a pure hypothesis, as Strassman himself has later acknowledged, although it has been taken as axiomatic by many people”.

Thanks Henri. Good data.

32 minutes ago, Ant said:

@A Sahota 

Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism by Chogyam Trungpa

http://www.shambhala.com/cutting-through-spiritual-materialism.html

Altered states are not spiritual.  

Thanks Ant.

Too many people are ignorant (and won't listen) to the dangers of psychedelics.

Please inform yourself guys. Don't take the "shortcut" to "enlightenment".

Chris

 

Edited April 17, 2016 by Isle of View

[Isle of View]

It"s ultimately every-bodies own choice.

However, education and data is important to make a well informed choice.

And you can do nothing about it when somebody genuinely cares.

Edited April 17, 2016 by Isle of View

[Henri]

@Ant The topic `psychedelics` comes down to the question if experiences with psychedelics can be called spiritual.

They are not, as simply as that.

If someone wants to take drugs, be my guest. Just do not say you are coming closer to enlightenment, truth or whatever.

One can even say who wants to take psychedelics? Ego looking for out of ego experiences without the intention to actually `do` something, meaning developing yourself in any way by meditation, yoga or another spiritual discipline. It`s really typical western hubris.

[Richard Alpert]

2 hours ago, Henri said:

@Ant The topic `psychedelics` comes down to the question if experiences with psychedelics can be called spiritual.

They are not, as simply as that.

If someone wants to take drugs, be my guest. Just do not say you are coming closer to enlightenment, truth or whatever.

One can even say who wants to take psychedelics? Ego looking for out of ego experiences without the intention to actually `do` something, meaning developing yourself in any way by meditation, yoga or another spiritual discipline. It`s really typical western hubris.

They can be called "spiritual" because they can temporarily show you a state of satori, enlightenment or whatever..

You can be in completely "egoless" state under the influence of psychedelic. I´ve been doing yoga, meditation for few years and i have to say mushrooms has opened my mind the most. You can say anything you want, but you can take away peoples experiences. Listen for example Ram Dass first trip report (YouTube) 

[Richard Alpert]

 

[Richard Alpert]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NhQZ6dJzIo

[Henri]

@Richard Alpert    Spirituality is about up-lifting the spirit. In a healthy `spiritual` way one has to undergo specific training before even have the possibility to get to the point to experience Samadhi. This training is essential. You are preparing your 4 kosha`s (bodies) and work with body, mind, intellect and the energy, the prana. It`s like building a house, you first need a good foundation.

In that sense it is possible to get to the top of the house without even having a foundation that is ready. Off course. You can take a ladder and climb 10 meters high to join the view. But it`s dangerous, you can easily fall down.

The reason so called enlightened ones fall down doing ordinary human stuff like the common stories about teachers having sex with their pupils is just because of that. They never build a good foundation, it`s just waiting for their karma to get activated. So would you call someone who climbed the ladder a spiritual person? Would you call him a good constructor? I would call him ignorant and fooled, though their experiences can off course be profound to the untrained eye.

The video about Ram Dass telling his experiences with mushrooms is a good one. He is having this amazing experience with his ego, his personality and the transcendence of it. Sure it`s spectacular. The funny thing though is that Ram Dass is so immersed in telling how his experience was, telling all the little details of it, how transforming it all was to him. But it is in no way comparable with experiencing Samadhi. You have ever heard someone talk that way when coming out of Samadhi? No, it`s a total different category. The first Samadhi you`ll experience is when in the building process the highest point is reached. You can walk up the stairs and enjoy the view all around from different viewpoints. You see easily the still unfinished work in a very safe way. And the biggest difference is that when you come down the stairs to join the other constructors you are not going to tell them what an amazing experience you have had. No, you point them out what`s the work still to be done. You support them with their own unfinished jobs and you`ll do that with compassion, love, joy, where in no way any `I` is involved. You have become the perfect teacher and manager, the one who knows.

So we can argue if the view on top of the ladder is comparable with the view on the rooftop. To my opinion it`s not and I state that with the same video about Ram Dass. In Samadhi there is no room for bad trips, fear and anxiety. Samadhi is total bliss, Sat, Chit and Ananda.

 

[David1]

On 17-4-2016 at 11:14 AM, Henri said:

Anyway, the topic drugs, psychedelics, Ayahuasca and whatever is already a lot discussed on this site. To my opinion it`s in a way ruining this site when it`s discussed next to the real spiritual stuff. It`s like a site which is devoted to the newest cars and people are throwing posts of their newest bikes on it. So @Leo Gura maybe a good suggestion to make a separate chapter on the drugs stuff to keep it away from real and more important posts?

 

I agree with you Henri. We can blab all day long about this and it won't get us any further. But if there is one thing you can't accuse psychedelics of, is that its not 'real'. You know...i can dress myself up in a red toga and shave my head and cite the Vedas, give seminars and talk about enlightenment and blablabla...and its all bullshit. Its a story, a role. I can sit for a month fantasising about porn, and then tell you i got enlightened. There is no way for you to tell if my experience is real or not. All religions, money, countries, borders, politics, tv, books, drama, self developement...all stories. Nothing is real. The only thing that's real is your experience. And that's what psychedelics give...a real experience. Undeniable. If you take 5 grams of dried psylocibine mushrooms, you will have an experience. That's guaranteed. Its real. Like taking a kick in the groin. No need for prayer, or meditation or believing in anything. Like Terrence Mckenna sais...'You don't need to adjust your opinion to suit it'.
That being said,...talking about psychedelics is like whispering past the graveyard. Its pointless. Talking about any experience basically is...I can talk about that time i got kicked in the groin for ever. If you were never kicked there...you won't understand 

[Henri]

@David1  I fully agree with everything you said. Experience is always the highest.

Nevertheless experiences need to be interpreted. 

So taking psychedelics and having that experience is one thing, but afterwards interpreted them in a wrong way is something else.

Believing (!) psychedelics give you the same experience as spiritual work is no right knowledge. Without the right knowledge where do you go with your interpretations?

Is a 15 year old right when he tells you he feels spiritual after smoking his first joint?

[David1]

26 minutes ago, Henri said:

Is a 15 year old right when he tells you he feels spiritual after smoking his first joint?

Is a 15 year old right when he tells you a rollercoaster is a hellish experience and it's the work of the devil? If that is his experience, than who am i to deny that? The only thing i can say is 'it isn't for me'. 
You can say to me...hey, there are much greater experiences...do this and this. And i believe you. 

 

29 minutes ago, Henri said:

So taking psychedelics and having that experience is one thing, but afterwards interpreted them in a wrong way is something else.

See the example of the rollercoaster. What is a great experience for one person, can be a terrible experience for another person. Who is right and who is wrong? Same experience, different interpretations. Your experience is real. If your experience of a rollercoaster is terrifying. Then that's real for you. Nobody can tell you...nono you're wrong. It's not scary at all.

[Henri]

What Leo teaches us with his work, self-actualization, enlightenment-work with his videos and his words is knowledge, it is science.

The ancient spiritual methods towards enlightenment is science, the highest science possible to study and work on in this life.

We talk about the science of yoga, the science of pranayama, the science of meditation.

Doing psychedelics is no science. It is gambling with your life, gambling with the gift of life. There is no certain or known outcome. You do not know which tendencies or karma you will be awaken while taking psychedelics. You do not know the dangers that are hidden concerning one of your kosha`s. There is nothing you know in advance. It`s one big gamble.

Self-development, self-actualization, self-enlightenment is far away from gambling. It is the ultimate truth, the ultimate science.

[Henri]

@David1 Well mate, your comment says you are green by the spiral dynamics.

You believe everybody is having his own truth? It`s all just a subjective party?

[charlie2dogs]

26 minutes ago, David1 said:

Is a 15 year old right when he tells you a rollercoaster is a hellish experience and it's the work of the devil? If that is his experience, than who am i to deny that? The only thing i can say is 'it isn't for me'. 
You can say to me...hey, there are much greater experiences...do this and this. And i believe you. 

 

See the example of the rollercoaster. What is a great experience for one person, can be a terrible experience for another person. Who is right and who is wrong? Same experience, different interpretations. Your experience is real. If your experience of a rollercoaster is terrifying. Then that's real for you. Nobody can tell you...nono you're wrong. It's not scary at all.

just because you have an experience doesnt make it real, just because you believe in something doesnt make it true, doesnt mean that it is reality, what kind of experience would be considered real? what is truth and where can truth be found, what is reality and where can reality be found?  if the experience, truth or so called reality is from the experience of the identity (human being) it is never true, real or reality, it is only programing, belief, or a warped perception of the events that the identity thinks is real, true and reality.  Real, truth,  and reality cannot be experienced as as the identity first of all because it is existing as a hologram a fictitious identity, it is totally programed with every nonsense in this physical world, all of the programing is turned into a false belief system, all of this creates a warped perception of everything the identity thinks is real, true and reality.

[Nathalie]

and I hope that no labile person will read this topic, eventually understand it as a recommendation and try it out in order to become enlightened

.. or what ever the goal may be...

[David1]

5 minutes ago, charlie2dogs said:

just because you have an experience doesnt make it real, just because you believe in something doesnt make it true, doesnt mean that it is reality, what kind of experience would be considered real?

If i kick you in the groin...i doubt that you want to debate if its real or not. You'll know that it's real. Whether you believe it is existing as a hologram or warped perception or whatever. It all doesn't matter. It's a real experience for you at that time.