Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
I have spent a fair bit of time around Evangelical Christians and I would say that for the majority this was probably not the case. The Evangelicals I know would not say that they fear having fun, just that they prefer to stay in control and at the end of the day have the satisfaction of knowing that they resisted temptation (a very big thing in some Evo circles) and that they spent another day living in the manner they think brings them closer to their paradise. That is not the same as not having fun, it is just a different kind of enjoyment. I have found the same thing on retreats when I have taken the precepts and avoid drinking, dancing, music and so on. I am still enjoying myself without any of the accoutrements that modern thinking constitute fun. Fun isn't manufactured by alcohol or dancing, I have been completely miserable dancing in a rubbish disco with half a dozen ridiculous cocktails in my stomach and I have been absolutely laughing like a drain halfway up a mountain with only a cup of tea and a good friend.
The mind creates fun despite external conditions not because of them.
Is it just my thinking, or has this thread been veering largely off-topic even from its beginning??? I take the opening post/original post to be about TOXINS generically, and NOT about alcohol per se.
Guarding our minds from intoxication and toxicity would necessarily include being aware of the kinds of information we take in. Gossip, slander, toxic people, poisonous attitudes, and some media. (Is watching Simon Cowell degrade and humiliate hopeful young artists and singers really entertainment? What does it say about you if you enjoy this?)
The OP goes on to talk about the mindfulness tradition precluding, as it were, hard-and-fast rules in favor of people being able to let the river of life flow through them without too much rigid constriction. Lacking this mindfulness component:
Religiosity is a consumable toxin. And for those who would make this vow of alcohol/toxin abstinence – especially for religious reasons – I would advise them to search deeply and tread carefully.
Do not replace one with another more difficult to abstain from and near impossible to identify or be aware of. In fact, one could argue that Religiosity has a built-in system to keep its addicts blind to their affliction – fear of punishment and moral guilt. Perpetually conditioned to believe themselves undeserving and inadequate.
I think @Seph is also talking about the vicious circle we create for ourselves when the bar is set too high and we fail to meet our (and others') expectations:
Maybe we should explore some traditional understandings or assumptions about 'vows'. Many of our “Western Traditions” or beliefs or religions – like the Evangelical, Catholic, or Muslim mentioned earlier – are ethical systems governed by rules. They are based on obedience to regulations and consequences. Failure or disobedience comes with moral guilt and fear of punishment. Ultimately, whether intentionally or not, it is a system of fear - and in turn - punishment. Taking a vow of alcohol abstinence in this tradition can only end in a fear of failure. There are no degrees or gradations allowed, for its purpose is not focused on personal growth or improvement, because improvement is an ongoing process, and process involves growth, and growth involves failure.
Thank you.
Yes, it would seem that everybody's focusing in alcohol consumption (not necessarily drunkenness) rather than taking toxins within one's mind.
This is a dangerous component of any religion (or philosophy), and at its worst, can devolve into pure ideological fanaticism and fundamentalism. In just about all religious traditions there is what I like to call a 'fail-safe device' (which usually falls under the category of 'mysticism,' which is somewhat misleading).
That fail-safe device in theistic religious traditions is expressed in apophatism (God does not exist, and also, God does not NOT exist either)-- using a language very reminiscent of Nagarjuna. Pseudo-Dionysius and Eckhart are particularly representative in Christianity, An-Niffari and Sufis in Islam, etc. etc. The Daodejing opens with the fail-safe from the very start, a sort of metaphysical disclaimer: 'Dao called "Dao" is not the eternal Dao.' In Mahayana tradition, emptiness should not be understood as an actual metaphysical substratum underlying all of existence: emptiness too is empty! Doorways are meant to be walked through, not to be adored.
All this peculiar talk is designed to undercut any ideological clinging to God or the Absolute. There is a difference between the trust of faith and mere fanaticism which is driven by fear. Unfortunately, Christianity as it has evolved in the U.S. rarely represents this approach, and this has consequently impoverished their own tradition.
@Seph it might have been more helpful to not name the title of the tread with alcohol as the title seems to imply "Here, if you don't want to drink try this."
As far as all the toxins we put in our mind, I absolutely agree. People in the western world are so used to absorbing them that they can't even see them as toxins or see in any way that they are harmful. The idea that everything we see and hear changes our brain is still very foreign to people. The western culture is very much built as a culture of fear, in many ways. There's a terrific book about it out there that I believe is actually called The Culture of Fear. I'll have to find it and double check.
But it's also pretty hard to live in the western world and not be affected by it. I use facebook to keep up with friends and family I don't see often. But even if I'm trying to avoid the news, it's all over facebook in my relatives posts. So, my only option is to completely ditch facebook which then leaves me again out of touch with people who are in other countries and such. That's unlikely to happen. Even here, we discuss news topics. It's often unescapable, which is why a sound practice of calming the mind and starting to detoxify it is important.
@NewBuddhist_user it might have been more helpful not to name the title of the tread with alcohol [substitute] as the title seems to imply "Here, if you don't want to drink try this."
Yea, for extremely good reasons, I am sure, the moderators and everyone else chose to limit the amount of edit time to 15 minutes (although 20 are needed).
BUT EVERYONE SHOULD READ THE FIRST POST. FULL STOP.
Seph's post from his blog was very thoughtful and dealt in a very responsible and humane way with our fear-based motivations to follow the rules of the herd rather than to live mindfully, opening ourselves up more fully to the river of life flowing through our veins. I think what he has to say vis à vis the strictures of rules, vows, and positions we take is very conscientious. He suggests we confront some of these things more as toxins when so they are —than as the desireable paths they often are not.
In the Mindfulness tradition the practices governing ethical behaviour are primarily concerned with shaping personal character. If one falls short of the promise, they simply take note of the shortcoming and vow to do better on the next occasion, without the feeling of incompetence or moral guilt.
This particular way of approaching ethical conduct invites the individual to act morally – not to avoid punishment (I don't run a red traffic light because I'm afraid of getting a ticket, but because I understand the danger I put myself and others in), but for the more positive and constructive purpose of refining one's character and promoting the well-being of the world (solace and compassion). This Mindfulness tradition uses neither the stick nor the carrot. (I am not given a reward for my good behaviour).
I think the OP made an erroneous assumption that people stick to precepts or commandments out of fear. This observation was made early on in the discussion, but the OP didn't address it, so the evolved in a different direction. I don't see a problem with that. The OP can always return and guide the discussion, if s/he feels it's going in an unintended and unproductive direction.
I think the OP made an erroneous assumption that people stick to precepts or commandments out of fear. This observation was made early on in the discussion, but the OP didn't address it, so the evolved in a different direction. I don't see a problem with that. The OP can always return and guide the discussion, if s/he feels it's going in an unintended and unproductive direction.
That's a good point. What is a thread in a forum? It's a conversation. When one is in a conversation -- perhaps at a party -- one doesn't reprimand another when the conversation drifts from one topic to another. That's how conversations work. And while a thread ought to stay on topic more than a verbal conversation, the thread won't always go where the original poster intended.
I enjoyed reading @Seph's post. But when I saw the title, I went into it with alcohol on my mind, so when I was reading that is what was sticking. Since that is largely the direction the discussion went, I assume that many others did the same thing. Add to that that alcohol is always a hot discussion when it comes up. It's an easy single thing to focus on, as opposed to all the vast toxins mentioned in the first post.
@Seph it might have been more helpful to not name the title of the tread with alcohol as the title seems to imply "Here, if you don't want to drink try this."
Well, to be honest, I liked the title (and deliberately chose it) for several reasons. Firstly, for exactly the reason you suggest it should have been titled otherwise. I like titles with more than one 'level'. Maybe it's just a character quirk.
(Secondly, as a printer (professionally) Alcohol Substitute is an actual chemical (the use of alcohol in Canada in the offset printing industry isn't allowed anymore).)
But you can't assume that other people see the many levels of your thinking that went into your title. I'm a very literal thinker, for the most part. If that is what it says, that's how I read it.
LOL Actually, I am quite a hippy. But my version of the precepts doesn't say to abstain 100%. It says to abstain from causing heedlessness. And, actually, that's not even a precept I've taken because it wasn't one of those given by my teacher.
I'm with karasti on this. Say what you mean, mean what you say. As far as splitting the meaning of the 5th precept to include all toxic input into the mind ... I'd say that's not included in the idea of the 5th precept.
The 'toxins' one encounters, indulges in, or puts into the mind (examples given were gossip, toxic personalities, slander, etc) are pretty much covered in the 8 fold path.
IMO you are reading way more into the 5th precept than was most likely intended; and that was simply the actual physical ingesting of alcohol and/or other intoxicants.
IMO you are reading way more into the 5th precept than was most likely intended; and that was simply the actual physical ingesting of alcohol and/or other intoxicants.
I humbly must disagree here. I don't believe the issue is with drinking alcohol but rather with drunkenness. Moderation - the middle path.
IMO you are reading way more into the 5th precept than was most likely intended; and that was simply the actual physical ingesting of alcohol and/or other intoxicants.
I humbly must disagree here. I don't believe the issue is with drinking alcohol but rather with drunkenness. Moderation - the middle path.
But that's okay. We don't need to agree.
Actually I do agree with you- I too believe it's about drunkenness or intoxication - by way of drinking alcohol or doing 'drugs' to that point of heedlessness.
What I don't agree with is that it (the 5th precept) somehow encompasses all the other "toxins" we come into contact with and or indulge in... as mentioned above.
What I don't agree with is that it (the 5th precept) somehow encompasses all the other "toxins" we come into contact with and or indulge in... as mentioned above.
... okay... (not that this topic is about the precepts) but why wouldn't the precepts address this issue? I'm confused.
Guarding our minds from intoxication and toxicity would necessarily include being aware of the kinds of information we take in. Gossip, slander, toxic people, poisonous attitudes, and some media. (Is watching Simon Cowell degrade and humiliate hopeful young artists and singers really entertainment? What does it say about you if you enjoy this?) "
I may have misunderstood, but I thought you were alluding to the idea that the 5th precept about abstaining from heedlessness and drunkenness would in some way also prevent the other toxins we take in... which is why I said: "The 'toxins' one encounters, indulges in, or puts into the mind (examples given were gossip, toxic personalities, slander, etc) are pretty much covered in the 8 fold path."
I was not able to read all the post and some do appear to be very judgemental. My opinion may be upsetting and judged but I am used to it. I read you can not drink and assumed I would not be able to be a Buddhist. I literally gave up. I drink because I have an illness that responds to only alcohol. Many people don't believe that but it is a fact. I have Myoclonic Dystonia, I am allergic to the sun and my body hurts daily. I have violent shaking which mimics convulsions. I drink only one thing. If I drink, I can get out this bed and stop shaking in 15 minutes. If I don't, which I tried the day before yesterday, it means hours of violent shaking, no sleep and confinement to this bed. I shook for 8 hours just to go without drinking. It has been three days and my body still hurts. I pulled a muscle, hurt both my hands, and my arm was functioning at 20% for about a day.
I don't judge. I drink small amounts of alcohol. I am never drunk and only do it because there is no cure for my illness and I have tried many medications that do not work. Same with the medicinal marijuana. For those with some forms of Dystonia, this is all they have. According to a lot of what I have read, (not particularly here) people like us could never be Buddhist. I disagree.
@vinlyn, She does but only because they can't find medicine to control the symptoms. I was an alcoholic years ago. I quit drinking period. I only started back for the medical benefits. Medicinal marijuana was my other option but too risky. Social drinking is not an issue for me. I buy wine for friends who do not drink harder liquor and celebrate with virgin drinks for those who do not drink at all. Drinking is not very important to me. It may be to others though.
@MoonIzAMoore - Different Buddhist traditions and schools have different takes on the precepts, so it's not a hard-and-fast rule that alcohol is forbidden.
That being said, it's not "forbidden" anyway. The precepts are more like suggestions, and if one decides to not follow them, there's no supreme being to dole punishment. It's just that if you do things that the precepts warn against, you just have a greater likelihood of experiencing suffering.
But, as many Buddhists who take a more pragmatic perspective have understood, if you are moderate in your behaviour and do not let intoxicants or sexual activity cause you or others suffering, then there's no harm. It's just that, again, the potential is there.
And unless you're planning on ordaining, I don't see why you "could never be a Buddhist" for having the occasional drink, especially if it's for your own health.
Well, there are some toxins that are known to be commonly toxins now, but anything in excess is a toxin in some way, body or mind or brain toxin. Caffeine can be a toxin in excess too.
The problem with psychotropic toxins, is that chemistry varies a bunch from person to person when you get down to the fine details. I have a genetic/chemical combined condition brainwise which leaves me intellectually strong and very poor at handling stress and emotional swings. So I end up taking some of what for some are toxins, but for me are calmatives and balancers.
I do not self-medicate except on doctor's orders, and even then there are some things I know I cannot do. I finally found a practicing MD who is a psychiatrist who both listens to his patients well, and has an extremely good brain and both medical and pharmacutical knowledge. I have a cardiologist also, and take meds for heart. My GP doctor is a genius who knows enough to cross-check what the specialists he referred me to give me for meds, for interactions that are known bad.
Lesson? Balance so you get what you in truth need, not what someone out of the blue says might work to help because it works for them (don't rely on that only). Get a specialist's help for getting down to details as to what you should have.
Alcohol is pointless, don't see why people drink it, even in moderation.
Social lubricant.
Not in my case. I have the odd glass of beer or wine because I enjoy the taste. If alcohol -free wines or beers tasted the same as the real thing I would be quite happy with that..but they don't. So on this hot summers day I will wait until evening and then have a glass of chilled White Burgundy on the balcony...cheers ! ( its a 2009 Buene Blanc if anyone is interested ).
I drank...I drank some, then some more, now I can't tolerate the gulp of it and the gulp of Buddha's light at the same time. They don't go together...peanut butter and onion sandwich...eeeew ! I've tried, but it's gone...the high is already inside me...when I attempt to get it from the outside I feel kinda sick. I'm fascinated by this observation.
I don't drink to get high...I have a glass of beer or wine or a gin and tonic because I like it. The Buddhas light is right there as I have a sip...where else would it be ?
But each to their own.
1
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
Discussing drinking Alcohol in moderation, is like five blind men describing an elephant. Everyone has a different PoV. And that's ok. Let's not get prickly or defensive about it.
If you're under pressure to "go out and be social" in groups larger than you're comfortable with, maybe you need a different group of friends. I never experienced this kind of pressure, not in college, nor afterwards. No pressure to drink, either. My friends in college didn't drink, and most my friends in life following my university years were like that, too.
Namaste,
It is a lot harder for some people to give up their friends. I ended up having to make that decision after some of my friends spiked my drink with Ecstasy and GBH and I ended up in hospital with loss of limb control for two days. I used to drink when out with them and noticed my drinking increased significantly when with them. When I woke up one day with a barely noticeable hangover after consuming a 750ml bottle of vodka during a game of poker where the loser had to skoll a shot of alcohol, I knew things had to change. But I had desperately wanted to fit in because I was the new girl at school two years in a row, and these people had accepted me pretty much straight off the bat.
So while I agree with your sentiments, it's easier said than done for a lot of people.
I went three years without touching a drop of alcohol and only have a glass of wine ocassionally because I know if I increase my intake, I will likely start drinking like I used to and not only do I have my illness to deal with, I am responsible for a 12 year old child and I don't want her thinking it's normal to get ferschnickered regularly.
Comments
The mind creates fun despite external conditions not because of them.
Yes, it would seem that everybody's focusing in alcohol consumption (not necessarily drunkenness) rather than taking toxins within one's mind.
That fail-safe device in theistic religious traditions is expressed in apophatism (God does not exist, and also, God does not NOT exist either)-- using a language very reminiscent of Nagarjuna. Pseudo-Dionysius and Eckhart are particularly representative in Christianity, An-Niffari and Sufis in Islam, etc. etc. The Daodejing opens with the fail-safe from the very start, a sort of metaphysical disclaimer: 'Dao called "Dao" is not the eternal Dao.' In Mahayana tradition, emptiness should not be understood as an actual metaphysical substratum underlying all of existence: emptiness too is empty! Doorways are meant to be walked through, not to be adored.
All this peculiar talk is designed to undercut any ideological clinging to God or the Absolute. There is a difference between the trust of faith and mere fanaticism which is driven by fear. Unfortunately, Christianity as it has evolved in the U.S. rarely represents this approach, and this has consequently impoverished their own tradition.
As far as all the toxins we put in our mind, I absolutely agree. People in the western world are so used to absorbing them that they can't even see them as toxins or see in any way that they are harmful. The idea that everything we see and hear changes our brain is still very foreign to people. The western culture is very much built as a culture of fear, in many ways. There's a terrific book about it out there that I believe is actually called The Culture of Fear. I'll have to find it and double check.
But it's also pretty hard to live in the western world and not be affected by it. I use facebook to keep up with friends and family I don't see often. But even if I'm trying to avoid the news, it's all over facebook in my relatives posts. So, my only option is to completely ditch facebook which then leaves me again out of touch with people who are in other countries and such. That's unlikely to happen. Even here, we discuss news topics. It's often unescapable, which is why a sound practice of calming the mind and starting to detoxify it is important.
BUT EVERYONE SHOULD READ THE FIRST POST. FULL STOP.
Seph's post from his blog was very thoughtful and dealt in a very responsible and humane way with our fear-based motivations to follow the rules of the herd rather than to live mindfully, opening ourselves up more fully to the river of life flowing through our veins. I think what he has to say vis à vis the strictures of rules, vows, and positions we take is very conscientious. He suggests we confront some of these things more as toxins when so they are —than as the desireable paths they often are not.
Firstly, for exactly the reason you suggest it should have been titled otherwise. I like titles with more than one 'level'. Maybe it's just a character quirk.
(Secondly, as a printer (professionally) Alcohol Substitute is an actual chemical (the use of alcohol in Canada in the offset printing industry isn't allowed anymore).)
LOL Actually, I am quite a hippy. But my version of the precepts doesn't say to abstain 100%. It says to abstain from causing heedlessness. And, actually, that's not even a precept I've taken because it wasn't one of those given by my teacher.
The 'toxins' one encounters, indulges in, or puts into the mind (examples given were gossip, toxic personalities, slander, etc) are pretty much covered in the 8 fold path.
IMO you are reading way more into the 5th precept than was most likely intended; and that was simply the actual physical ingesting of alcohol and/or other intoxicants.
I don't believe the issue is with drinking alcohol but rather with drunkenness.
Moderation - the middle path.
But that's okay. We don't need to agree.
What I don't agree with is that it (the 5th precept) somehow encompasses all the other "toxins" we come into contact with and or indulge in... as mentioned above.
I'm confused.
"Seph said:
Guarding our minds from intoxication and toxicity would necessarily include being aware of the kinds of information we take in. Gossip, slander, toxic people, poisonous attitudes, and some media. (Is watching Simon Cowell degrade and humiliate hopeful young artists and singers really entertainment? What does it say about you if you enjoy this?) "
I may have misunderstood, but I thought you were alluding to the idea that the 5th precept about abstaining from heedlessness and drunkenness would in some way also prevent the other toxins we take in... which is why I said: "The 'toxins' one encounters, indulges in, or puts into the mind (examples given were gossip, toxic personalities, slander, etc) are pretty much covered in the 8 fold path."
Like I said, I may have misunderstood?
I don't judge. I drink small amounts of alcohol. I am never drunk and only do it because there is no cure for my illness and I have tried many medications that do not work. Same with the medicinal marijuana. For those with some forms of Dystonia, this is all they have. According to a lot of what I have read, (not particularly here) people like us could never be Buddhist. I disagree.
That being said, it's not "forbidden" anyway. The precepts are more like suggestions, and if one decides to not follow them, there's no supreme being to dole punishment. It's just that if you do things that the precepts warn against, you just have a greater likelihood of experiencing suffering.
But, as many Buddhists who take a more pragmatic perspective have understood, if you are moderate in your behaviour and do not let intoxicants or sexual activity cause you or others suffering, then there's no harm. It's just that, again, the potential is there.
And unless you're planning on ordaining, I don't see why you "could never be a Buddhist" for having the occasional drink, especially if it's for your own health.
The problem with psychotropic toxins, is that chemistry varies a bunch from person to person when you get down to the fine details. I have a genetic/chemical combined condition brainwise which leaves me intellectually strong and very poor at handling stress and emotional swings. So I end up taking some of what for some are toxins, but for me are calmatives and balancers.
I do not self-medicate except on doctor's orders, and even then there are some things I know I cannot do. I finally found a practicing MD who is a psychiatrist who both listens to his patients well, and has an extremely good brain and both medical and pharmacutical knowledge. I have a cardiologist also, and take meds for heart. My GP doctor is a genius who knows enough to cross-check what the specialists he referred me to give me for meds, for interactions that are known bad.
Lesson? Balance so you get what you in truth need, not what someone out of the blue says might work to help because it works for them (don't rely on that only). Get a specialist's help for getting down to details as to what you should have.
If alcohol -free wines or beers tasted the same as the real thing I would be quite happy with that..but they don't.
So on this hot summers day I will wait until evening and then have a glass of chilled White Burgundy on the balcony...cheers ! ( its a 2009 Buene Blanc if anyone is interested ).
I'm fascinated by this observation.
The Buddhas light is right there as I have a sip...where else would it be ?
But each to their own.
Everyone has a different PoV.
And that's ok.
Let's not get prickly or defensive about it.
Things are as they are.
It is a lot harder for some people to give up their friends. I ended up having to make that decision after some of my friends spiked my drink with Ecstasy and GBH and I ended up in hospital with loss of limb control for two days. I used to drink when out with them and noticed my drinking increased significantly when with them. When I woke up one day with a barely noticeable hangover after consuming a 750ml bottle of vodka during a game of poker where the loser had to skoll a shot of alcohol, I knew things had to change. But I had desperately wanted to fit in because I was the new girl at school two years in a row, and these people had accepted me pretty much straight off the bat.
So while I agree with your sentiments, it's easier said than done for a lot of people.
I went three years without touching a drop of alcohol and only have a glass of wine ocassionally because I know if I increase my intake, I will likely start drinking like I used to and not only do I have my illness to deal with, I am responsible for a 12 year old child and I don't want her thinking it's normal to get ferschnickered regularly.
In metta,
Raven