Dangers of psychedelics?

[SaWaSaurus]

Psychedelics have been my primary tool for self-actualization thus far, and they've helped me dig myself out of a hole I was in. Shortly after my psychedelic pursuit, I discovered the benefits of other self-actualizing tools like meditation and breath-work, along with actualized.org. Lately however, I've been hearing about the downsides of relying on psychedelics for awakening experiences. Do you think the use of psychedelics is a hindrance in long term spiritual growth? What are, if any, the downsides of psychedelics? Below I'll give a couple arguments I've received when talking about psychedelics for spiritual growth:

Quote

Psychedelics are like binoculars, they allow you to see ahead and determine whether or not you're on the right path. But once you come down from the trip, you're back where you started and must still do the work to reach that level of consciousness you experienced in the psychedelic state. Therefore, psychedelics can become an attachment which you cling to for spiritual bliss, without your base level consciousness necessarily increasing.

Quote

Many people have strung out on psychedelics. It really only helps certain people with stable minds. I'm not denying the positive of psychedelics. However just due to the nature of the human ego most use it as a way to avoid their issues. However this could be said for other spiritual practices. Psychedelics is terrible for people who don't have a good grasp on reality. Also the insights psychedelics give are not the same as yogic schools. Nor is it the same as the zen tradition. For example Leo made a video saying all enlightenment were practically the same. It is untrue Zen satori is just a brief awakening experience. It is not equal to the Samadhi sadhguru had. Awakening out of the mind is not the same as a flow state. A flow state is not the same as unity consciousness. That isn't the same as ego death a temporary loss of the i. That isn't the same as a NDE which apparently is permanent. Leo has some decent stuff but pretends to know more than he does. However if we were honest we would know. He knew most of humanity doesn't have basic honesty. So he was able to lure us.

 

[MrDmitriiV]

@SaWaSaurus Psychedelics can be used either to hinder or skyrocket your progress towards enlightenment.

Use them wrong, you'll fail.

Use them right, you'll succeed. 

First you need a very good fundamental understanding (in an intellectual manner) of the limits of rationality, the nature of reality and just what lies beyond our ego. Then you'll learn more from your trips.

Watch Leo's vids and read books related to spirituality and the true nature of reality. 

By far the best book I ever read is "The Book of Not Knowing" by Peter Ralston, every paragraph is packed with enormous wisdom. 

 

watch part 2 as well

 

 

also his vids on psychadelics.

[Dogsbestfriend]

I can second that Peter Ralston recommendation!

Also regarding downsides there are the people that have suffered psychosis as a combination of having a fragile mind and taking them.. so yea there are deff dangers.

[SgtPepper]

10 hours ago, SaWaSaurus said:

Psychedelics have been my primary tool for self-actualization thus far, and they've helped me dig myself out of a hole I was in. Shortly after my psychedelic pursuit, I discovered the benefits of other self-actualizing tools like meditation and breath-work, along with actualized.org. Lately however, I've been hearing about the downsides of relying on psychedelics for awakening experiences. Do you think the use of psychedelics is a hindrance in long term spiritual growth? What are, if any, the downsides of psychedelics? Below I'll give a couple arguments I've received when talking about psychedelics for spiritual growth:

 

Downsides are getting attached to them, abusing them, or having a severe mental disorder like schizophrenia which usually stems from a quality in the individual not psychedelics themselves. Otherwise, I do not see how they would effect awakening experiences in a negative way.

Quote

"Psychedelics is terrible for people who don't have a good grasp on reality"

possibly. But do we really know this to be true?

Quote

Also the insights psychedelics give are not the same as yogic schools. Nor is it the same as the zen tradition

why not and how do they know? I have gotten insights from psychedelics that I later read in "The Power of Now" WITHOUT any help from eastern literature.

Quote

It is untrue Zen satori is just a brief awakening experience. It is not equal to the Samadhi sadhguru had. Awakening out of the mind is not the same as a flow state. A flow state is not the same as unity consciousness. That isn't the same as ego death a temporary loss of the i. That isn't the same as a NDE which apparently is permanent. Leo has some decent stuff but pretends to know more than he does. However if we were honest we would know. He knew most of humanity doesn't have basic honesty. So he was able to lure us."

- how does this person know these things? He speaks confidently of Sadhguru's level of consciousness and Leo's level of consciousness.

My point is, be careful assuming stuff about people and about psychedelics. You can try to box psychedelics and people with ideas, but chances are you are missing a perspective that really allows you to get a wholesome understanding.

[Forestluv]

For me, the downsides of psychedelics:

1. Insomnia

2. Nausea

3. Social ignorance/stigma. I wish there were social psychedelic groups like there are yoga groups.

4. Length of trip. With trips lasting 5+ hours, I pretty much need to devote a whole day. Plus, starting in the afternoon/night would keep me up all night with insomnia.

I’ve found a balanced spiritual practice to be 1-2 psychedelic trips per month, daily meditation, yoga 6x per week and shamanic breathing once per week.

[Nahm]

“If you get the message, hang up the phone. For psychedelic drugs are simply instruments, like microscopes, telescopes, and telephones. The biologist does not sit with eye permanently glued to the microscope, he goes away and works on what he has seen.”

― Alan W. Watts

[Forestluv]

8 minutes ago, Nahm said:

“If you get the message, hang up the phone. For psychedelic drugs are simply instruments, like microscopes, telescopes, and telephones. The biologist does not sit with eye permanently glued to the microscope, he goes away and works on what he has seen.”

― Alan W. Watts

And the biologist does not throw away the microscope. He returns to see more. Then leaves, then returns. There is wisdom in knowing when, and how long, to sit with the microscope.

[Jamie Universe]

@Nahm @Serotoninluv oh shit

[Leo Gura]

21 hours ago, SaWaSaurus said:

For example Leo made a video saying all enlightenment were practically the same. It is untrue Zen satori is just a brief awakening experience. It is not equal to the Samadhi sadhguru had. Awakening out of the mind is not the same as a flow state. A flow state is not the same as unity consciousness. That isn't the same as ego death a temporary loss of the i. That isn't the same as a NDE which apparently is permanent. Leo has some decent stuff but pretends to know more than he does.

I repeatedly stated that there are many facets and levels of depth to nonduality, and also all kinds of mystical and non-ordinary states of consciousness.

But this is actually a case for using more psychedelics, not less. It's precisely because there are so many facets and various kinds of states and levels of depth that without psychedelics you will almost never explore even a small percentage of them.

There is also a confusion happening here between stages of development vs states of consciousness. They not the same thing.

Also, NDEs are not permanent. By definition, an NDE is a near death EXPERIENCE. And I've never conflated NDEs with awakening. They are very different things.

I have repeatedly told you guys that this entire field is much more nuanced and complex than most people assume.

And therefore, psychedelics are a great tool to explore this vast landscape and see what's up.

The only problem is that people don't want to do it. They want one simple solution rather than doing 100s of trips and dealing with all the questions they will raise in your mind.

No one is suggesting that you trip once and close your mind down. Just the opposite. You trip more and more, with each trip your mind opens more and more.

It's sort of like you're being told, "Hey, go travel to Africa, there's cool stuff to see there." and you say, "No way, it's too dangerous!" or you say, "I've been to Africa once and seen everything there is to see."

Both attitudes are deeply misguided.

You could trip 100 times and still not see everything there is to see. People who have tripped less than 50 times, I can't even take them seriously. They have a massive lack of experience.

So before you ask people for advice on psychedelics, first ask them, how many times have you tripped, and on how many different substances and at which dosages and under which conditions? That will shut most people up as it would be embarrassing for them to admit their lack of experience.

Before you even think of hanging up the phone, answer it 100 times. You never know who's calling.

Whatever excuses you have for not doing psychedelics, that's just what they are, excuses.

Are there dangers? Of course! Exploration of any kind is dangerous. If you want to be safe, stay in the middle of mindless herd. Exploration is for daring souls. The mindless herd will always whine and complain about why exploration is evil. Don't ask a sheep for advice on how to be a lion.

[Nahm]

@Serotoninluv For sure. Both seem true. 

[Forestluv]

@Nahm I’m still developing my intuition for when I’m clinging / chasing a trip experience and when it’s time for a new lesson. When I was a newbie, I wanted to return to that mystical place. One time I was scolded: “why are you coming back again for the same lesson you’ve been told three times now?!”

[Key Elements]

@Leo Gura Leo, I'm not against you taking psychedelics at all. The bottom line is, it's a person's choice. No one can tell you what you can and cannot do. However, knowing someone else's spiritual path and understanding it fully is a completely different story. Radical open-mindedness, right? No will come up to you and tell you their spiritual path in a straightforward and honest way because no one wants to be criticized in the wrong way. They want to continue their journey knowing that everything is one and interconnected. You also have to explore non-psychedelics spiritual awakenings deeply and why they don't want to take psychedelics. Both sides have to be radically open-minded to sit down and talk like that--very rare case. I don't know if that even happens. There are always at least two sides to the same coin. 

[Leo Gura]

@Key Elements That's right, you must explore and discover the truth for yourself.

All else is hearsay.

Which is why I do BOTH: psychedelics and lots of non-psychedelic methods.

I was only arguing against those who oppose psychedelics on dogmatic grounds. This anti-psychedelic dogma is almost always rooted in lack of experience with psychedelics.

People do not fully appreciate just how badly our culture stigmatizes psychedelics. They take on this stigma and argue from this stigma unwittingly. Psychedelics have not become mainstream yet, so you will often find people criticizing them simply based on that.

[Key Elements]

@Leo Gura Ok, I understand what you mean, but I was talking about a person who has taken psychedelics with profound spiritual awakenings sitting down with a person who has never done psychedelics with profound spiritual awakenings. Let's say they have an honest discussion (not debate) about their spiritual path with radical open-mindedness. I bet there's a lot to discover. That's what I mean.

[Forestluv]

@Key Elements  A few days after I dd an Ayahuasca retreat in Peru, I met a woman who had just returned from six months in an Indian ashram (she had never done a psychedelic). We spent a whole day together sharing our experiences and insights. So amazing.

[cirkussmile]

Leo, Do Sadhguru have to take psychedelics at least 50 times before you can discuss with him about psychedelics? 

Background story is of great importance. Some people don’t have to trip 100s of times to know who they are, or at least be happy and fulfilled. 

People don’t have the same goals and missions as you have. You are telling your followers that they don’t know anything until they have tripped at least 50 times. I love your work but don’t you think you can be more clear that this is Your way of doing things and that has nothing to do with other people’s fulfillment and happiness? 

Psychedelics are great tools and I think everybody should try when they are ready. There’s a lot of potential and they can inspire you to practice meditation and other practices. But there IS a back side to it! People get caught up in experience and they talk so damn much about it that they forget or dismiss other people’s opinions and values. You are very good at stating your values and I like it! But not everyone sees it and misunderstanding and confusion may happen. Now, people will always misinterprete but at least we can be try to be more holostic when it comes to topics that have wide range of opinions and experiences. 

True non-duality is all inclusive. Not dismissing people who haven’t tripped enough. 

 

[Leo Gura]

10 minutes ago, cirkussmile said:

Leo, Do Sadhguru have to take psychedelics at least 50 times before you can discuss with him about psychedelics?

He'd have to do at least a dozen trips, yes.

Otherwise what would we be talking about?

Just because a person is enlightened does not mean he knows psychedelics.

It would be pointless discussing pizza with Sadhguru unless he ate some pizza first.

This is really just common sense. People who talk of things which they have zero experience with end up saying stupid things. I know cause I've done it. I am now much more careful about what I choose to speak about so that I don't over-step my experience too much. It's a constant problem. The mind loves to speak of things which it has not experienced as though it has.

[Key Elements]

@Serotoninluv ok cool. At the end of the conversation, would she want to do psychedelics? Why or why not? Have you gone into questions like that? She has to feel comfortable expressing everything without misunderstandings. That's what I mean by radical open-mindedness. 

[Forestluv]

We were both curious and open minded about each other’s paths. She told me her teacher told her not to do psychedelics - that it was good for some seekers, but not for her. Ayahuasca ceremonies are very common in this area of Peru. They don’t have the same stigma as in the U.S. She seemed grounded on her path without psychedelics. I on the other hand wanted to join an ashram after our conversation. 

Perhaps I should mention: my spiritual path was completely sober for 24 years. I was very much against combining drug use with spirituality. I often spoke against it. I just started psychedelic use two years ago.

[Key Elements]

@Serotoninluv As long as both parties are completely open without holding back any information, then you can learn a lot. A person who has never done psychedelics or SDS or any methods and got profound spiritual awakenings, cannot be called an "anti-psychedelics" person. You know, sometimes if there is the slightest hint of judgement, that's when information and expression of what really happened is held back. It also depends on the wording. These types of conversations also takes patience.