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.
.. IMHO, Poverty and Chastity and Unselfishness are promoted (like it or not). Buddhist Monks declare unceasingly the way of the true Dharmic methods by dissuading others from vice, inebriation, and extending into sexual matters. This has a practical application to the True Dharmic religion including very much in Buddhism. :doh:IMHO, To be honest, I do not know if this is stressed anywhere near enough.
It is possible that in a certain set and setting psychedelic entheogens would be beneficial. But in the vast majority of cases, it isn't, because they are treated as reasons to party rather than sacraments.
In my experience with psilocybin, there have definitely been some positive elements. When having a psychedelic experience, people tend to have many "realizations." I put that in quotes because the "realizations" could turn out to be false or insignificant when sober. However, I have found that the most profound realization that I achieved was that of living-in-the-moment. People spend their whole lives thinking about what has happened in the past, or worrying about what will happen in the future, and neglect the only existence that is real (right now). Something about the psychedelic experience forced me to realize this.
I originally used mushrooms in college as a recreational drug, not as a sacrament, as Karma Dondrup Tashi mentioned. I enjoyed it so much that I ended up tripping too often for about a year, with the false idea that these trips were leading me to enlightenment...or something. When I finally realized that I had come to the end of a dead end street, it was a unsettling. As Alan Watts said, "When you get the message, hang up the phone."
So I have a great deal of respect for the psychedelic experience. It has gifts to offer, but used incorrectly it can lead to bad things, and ultimately, it is not going to solve anything. Looking back, definitely the most important thing that I learned was to live in the moment. I still struggle with this, but at least I know that I want to strive to achieve a more lasting presence. I would tend to agree that seeking psychedelic experiences is not a Buddhist endeavor, however, there are much worse things for people to seek out.
Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education. However, through compassionate dialogue, help others renounce fanaticism and narrow-mindedness.
I don't agree with taking drugs and I don't find it helpful and I am happy to discuss it but I know its just a dialogue.
A practising Buddhist does not take mind altering drugs in any shape or form.
A practising Buddhist takes refuge in ordinary mind.
Depends on what you consider a buddhist. My lama has many students studying with her and we are not required to take a vow not to drink alcohol. I am also aware that in Tibetan buddhism alcohol is sometimes consumed in a ritual of some sort to show non-attachment to purity. So by saying that I am not a buddhist what is exactly the intention of that? As someone not a mentor to me I think you could damage my connection to the dharma. If you just want to help me stop drinnking maybe you could make a nice commercial with Nancy Reagan? :P
Interesting that recreational drug use is seen as a morality issue. Unless you hurt people when you are under the influence, I think that it is more of a personal responsibility issue.
SEX however, is absolutely a morality issue because it rarely does not have a dramatic affect on another being. Pornography contributes to exploitation and sexual bigotry, lust is a time soaker and mind decayer, perversion is a hunger that can grow to dangerous levels. Like it or not, most people do not seem to be designed for the hookup culture, so even if you are, the other person most likely is not and you are contributing to some pain on their part, therefor I would say that casual sex is wrong(also not even that much fun compared to deep intimate love makin).
I think that Martin Buber had it right when he spoke of living life in dialog with other eternal beings, I thou, recognizing and engaging the infinite in the other(human beings, nature, etc...), rather than using the other to feed the desires of the self.
I am just starting out in this Buddhism thing, so I am more adept at defending something from a logical POV rather than from some ancient text. But I view Buddhism as being more akin to philosophy or psychology rather than religion, so...yeah.
It is possible that in a certain set and setting psychedelic entheogens would be beneficial. But in the vast majority of cases, it isn't, because they are treated as reasons to party rather than sacraments.
haha sacraments, i like that. recreational drug consuming, in my view, is ok half the time, but like you say it'd be good if they were viewed as sacraments haha hA
A practising Buddhist does not take mind altering drugs in any shape or form.
A practising Buddhist takes refuge in ordinary mind.
dhammu dhatu, i consider myself a practicing buddhist and i take drugs on occasional occasion, and don't consider it a contradiction to my practice. the precept for laypersons is refrain from intoxication that generates recklessness and disregard for practice, right?
intoxicants are surely two-faced substances, that is they create different and unpredictable effects, which is why buddhist precepts suggest we steer clear of them. but i think it's a good idea to view drugs organically also and realize that we can be in harmony with taking them, and that ordinary mind transcends a drugged/nondrugged distinction sometimes. intoxicant is a good word because it implies toxicity as far as i read it, which doesn't necessarily inhere in drug use, and being sober can have intoxication within it too. drugs are a weird thing though, but they can be considered as medicine, similar to food.
When the use of drugs produces clinging, addiction, or habitual use, they can lead to suffering. Drugs certainly aren't alone in this regard however, as video games, TV, movies, good food, etc. can all easily do the same thing (I've known more people for whom MMO's have caused suffering then drugs). Drugs in and of themselves aren't the issue then; clinging is the issue.
What then about the claim that drug use clouds the mind and prevents insight? Certainly drug overuse can have lasting deleterious effects on the mind. But overuse of anything can have negative effects. During the drug experience the mind is certainly radically altered, but this experience soon passes. Either the experience was not insightful, in which case it's really no different from watching a movie for a couple hours where you turn your brain off, or the experience produced some insight that remains after the experience has ended.
Speaking from personal experience, I would say that limited drug use can, in some circumstances, produce insight. Before I tried marijuana, I had a very strong attachment to my mind that I didn't even realize I had. I assumed my mind was my self (or at least intricately tied up with my self) and that it stayed pretty much the same throughout time. After seeing how profoundly a simple chemical can affect how I perceived the world, I realized on a deeper level that happy mind state, sad mind state, angry mind state, tired mind state, etc. are not reflections of the world as it is, and that to attach to any passing mind state as "mine" or "myself" is folly. Of course I'm not saying that you need drugs to have this insight, but to say that all drug use is harmful is to reduce a complicated issue to an overly simplistic platitude.
I view drug experiences in much the same way I view Jhana experiences. Clinging to either one can produce suffering, and neither one are enlightened activities in and of themselves. In fact, there is evidence that the effect that some drugs have on the brain is indistinguishable from deep meditative states. What is the difference whether the experience is induced from an external chemical, or an internal chemical?
“Under the influences of hallucinogens,” Dr. Grob writes, “individuals transcend their primary identification with their bodies and experience ego-free states before the time of their actual physical demise, and return with a new perspective and profound acceptance of the life constant: change.”
I view drug experiences in much the same way I view Jhana experiences. What is the difference whether the experience is induced from an external chemical, or an internal chemical?
This is not actual jhana.
It is a delusion many meditators have when the get over-excited via attachment.
Real jhana is born of non-attachment.
Jhana and drugs cannot be compared to eachother in any shape or form.
Why do you feel the need to snidely call me a lamist? Does it boost you somehow? I really don't get it? Is it some kind of spectator sport with you? Thats called raising yourself on injured limbs... Probably not in the Pali Canon, but then you don't listen to anything outside that source I suppose?
Nameless its two different things entirely to say that drinking or drugs enhances meditation or something like that and to say "where I am today I drink or do drugs but I still study the dharma". Why does someone else feel the need to say who is and who isn't the buddhist? Its immature.
Why does someone else feel the need to say who is and who isn't the buddhist? Its immature.
I didn't. I just don't think this is the appropriate place to defend drug usage. It doesn't make sense to defend the effect that drugs have in "expanding the mind" (for whatever that means) in a forum of a religion who has been against intoxicants since the very beginning.
Nameless I would agree. I doubt very much that drugs and alcohol expand the mind. Unless you believe the theory that they kill off the weakest brain cells and make the overall brain stronger!! j/k
What I am saying is aside from the above debate there are many people who are not ready to get off drugs and alcohol yet. Not all people who drink are 'alcoholics' for one thing. But of course probably it would be benefitial to quit. Yet it is hard to quit. Not easy. I don't see any good coming of calling them 'not buddhists' for something.
We are all flawed human beings and I am sure 50% percent of the posts on the forum could just be criticizing eachother for non-buddhist behaviour which in itself would not be constructive behaviour.
I don't mind if someone wants a dialogue of why I drink and how that is in my life but I don't need some to slap me with the 'not real buddhist' label. It just seems very petty.
It doesn't make sense to defend the effect that drugs have in "expanding the mind" (for whatever that means) in a forum of a religion who has been against intoxicants since the very beginning.
It does make sense why aggressions overwhelm compassion, clouding our senses, but it also makes sense how not to let this happen. Especially when people talk about things we do not believe in... what a fine moment this is to accept multiple views on how things are!
Well I'm sorry DD but I took it as an insult. I actually don't practice guru yoga I am just taking a course with a lama and I participate in transcribing dharma talks.
I also meditate. I suppose that means I am a meditationist
Definition of a drug; A drug, broadly speaking, is any substance that, when absorbed into the body of a living organism, alters normal bodily function.
In pharmacology, a drug is "a chemical substance used in the treatment, cure, prevention, or diagnosis of disease or used to otherwise enhance physical or mental well-being
Recreational drugs are chemical substances that affect the central nervous system, such as opioids or hallucinogens.They may be used for perceived beneficial effects on perception, consciousness, personality, and behavior http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug
Cannabis; The major psychoactive chemical compound in cannabis is Δ<SUP>9</SUP>-tetrahydrocannabinol (commonly abbreviated as THC).... While many drugs clearly fall into the category of either stimulant, depressant, or hallucinogen, cannabis exhibits a mix of all properties, perhaps leaning the most towards hallucinogen or psychedelic properties, though with other effects quite pronounced as well. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marijuana
"Magic mushrooms"; AKA psilocybin mushrooms... Psilocybin (also known as psilocybine) is a hallucinogenic (entheogenic, psychedelic) indole of the tryptamine family...Once ingested, psilocybin is rapidly metabolised to psilocin, which then acts as a partial agonist at the 5-HT<SUB>2A</SUB> and 5-HT<SUB>1A</SUB> serotonin receptors in the brain. The mind-altering effects of psilocybin typically last anywhere from 3 to 8 hours; however, to individuals under the influence of psilocybin, the effects may seem to last much longer, since the drug can distort the perception of time. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psilocybin http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_mushrooms
Cocaine; Cocaine (benzoylmethylecgonine) is a crystalline tropane alkaloid that is obtained from the leaves of the coca plant. The name comes from "coca" in addition to the alkaloid suffix -ine, forming cocaine. It is a stimulant of the central nervous system and an appetite suppressant
Ok, that was a lot of information so let me break it down....
The western definition of a drug includes all the above (and many more). All these substances alter normal bodily function.
The Buddha never used the word "drugs" but said "intoxicants that cause heedlessness". Looking at the above we see the definition of intoxicant, and this definition includes caffeine as an intoxicant as well as all the others including cannibis and mushrooms.
So, we can safely say that, according to Buddhism, the above substances are intoxicants..... But the buddha went on to say "...that cause heedlessness..." so which ones of the above drugs cause heedlessness. Well, in the right doses, they all do!
So what is one to do?... Abstainhttp://www.thefreedictionary.com/abstain ask yourself, "am I in need of this?/do I require it?" or is it recreational?
I'm sure the Buddha would not tell someone to stop taking any of the above drugs if they truly required them. In fact, I'm sure I've read a sutta in which the Buddha told his followers to take medicine if required (perhaps the sutta-pitaka encycopidia that is Dhamma-Dhatu or Jason might help on that one?)
I included cocaine in that because cocaine is a natural drug. In parts of Brazil and Mexico, the locals chew the leaves to gain similar effects as cocaine. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coca
When you practise Buddhism, you practise Buddhism.
When you take drugs, you cease to practise Buddhism.
Your Buddhist practise is at times temporary.
Only an arahant practises Buddhism 100% of the time.
Thus your statement "i consider myself a practicing buddhist" is not completely accurate.
hehe, ok, but here's a koan for you if a shrimp is on a cocktail does it still dream for the sea? i have been 'ünder the influence' as they say on drugs just like you are when under the sea and i've done zazen in that state, does this relinquish my status as a practicing buddhist or is it just a nymph grazing in the river? PENCIL TREES! the buddha sitting in zazen is also in the magic plant in my opinion. this is an interesting view you have though on arahats being the only thoroughly buddhist practitioners. what does qualify one as one hundred percent buddhist in every single moment?
It is a delusion many meditators have when the get over-excited via attachment.
Real jhana is born of non-attachment.
Jhana and drugs cannot be compared to eachother in any shape or form.
There's far too much erroneous comparison with drug highs and Buddhist meditation in general. When I was at university I smoked cannabis and experimented with all kinds of drugs including various hallucinogenics. I had no ill effects from them and eventually had the sense to stop because it was obviously a dead end occupation -and I saw some scary casualties too.
There's absolutely no comparison to Jhana or any other experience in Buddhist practice. I'm astonished that there's so much emphasis on the supposed benefits of drug highs with posters here at this forum recently.
Comments
.
.
I have read that sugar is bad for your memory as well.
I originally used mushrooms in college as a recreational drug, not as a sacrament, as Karma Dondrup Tashi mentioned. I enjoyed it so much that I ended up tripping too often for about a year, with the false idea that these trips were leading me to enlightenment...or something. When I finally realized that I had come to the end of a dead end street, it was a unsettling. As Alan Watts said, "When you get the message, hang up the phone."
So I have a great deal of respect for the psychedelic experience. It has gifts to offer, but used incorrectly it can lead to bad things, and ultimately, it is not going to solve anything. Looking back, definitely the most important thing that I learned was to live in the moment. I still struggle with this, but at least I know that I want to strive to achieve a more lasting presence. I would tend to agree that seeking psychedelic experiences is not a Buddhist endeavor, however, there are much worse things for people to seek out.
Absolutely _/\_
.
Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education. However, through compassionate dialogue, help others renounce fanaticism and narrow-mindedness.
I don't agree with taking drugs and I don't find it helpful and I am happy to discuss it but I know its just a dialogue.
Depends on what you consider a buddhist. My lama has many students studying with her and we are not required to take a vow not to drink alcohol. I am also aware that in Tibetan buddhism alcohol is sometimes consumed in a ritual of some sort to show non-attachment to purity. So by saying that I am not a buddhist what is exactly the intention of that? As someone not a mentor to me I think you could damage my connection to the dharma. If you just want to help me stop drinnking maybe you could make a nice commercial with Nancy Reagan? :P
SEX however, is absolutely a morality issue because it rarely does not have a dramatic affect on another being. Pornography contributes to exploitation and sexual bigotry, lust is a time soaker and mind decayer, perversion is a hunger that can grow to dangerous levels. Like it or not, most people do not seem to be designed for the hookup culture, so even if you are, the other person most likely is not and you are contributing to some pain on their part, therefor I would say that casual sex is wrong(also not even that much fun compared to deep intimate love makin).
I think that Martin Buber had it right when he spoke of living life in dialog with other eternal beings, I thou, recognizing and engaging the infinite in the other(human beings, nature, etc...), rather than using the other to feed the desires of the self.
I am just starting out in this Buddhism thing, so I am more adept at defending something from a logical POV rather than from some ancient text. But I view Buddhism as being more akin to philosophy or psychology rather than religion, so...yeah.
intoxicants are surely two-faced substances, that is they create different and unpredictable effects, which is why buddhist precepts suggest we steer clear of them. but i think it's a good idea to view drugs organically also and realize that we can be in harmony with taking them, and that ordinary mind transcends a drugged/nondrugged distinction sometimes. intoxicant is a good word because it implies toxicity as far as i read it, which doesn't necessarily inhere in drug use, and being sober can have intoxication within it too. drugs are a weird thing though, but they can be considered as medicine, similar to food.
What then about the claim that drug use clouds the mind and prevents insight? Certainly drug overuse can have lasting deleterious effects on the mind. But overuse of anything can have negative effects. During the drug experience the mind is certainly radically altered, but this experience soon passes. Either the experience was not insightful, in which case it's really no different from watching a movie for a couple hours where you turn your brain off, or the experience produced some insight that remains after the experience has ended.
Speaking from personal experience, I would say that limited drug use can, in some circumstances, produce insight. Before I tried marijuana, I had a very strong attachment to my mind that I didn't even realize I had. I assumed my mind was my self (or at least intricately tied up with my self) and that it stayed pretty much the same throughout time. After seeing how profoundly a simple chemical can affect how I perceived the world, I realized on a deeper level that happy mind state, sad mind state, angry mind state, tired mind state, etc. are not reflections of the world as it is, and that to attach to any passing mind state as "mine" or "myself" is folly. Of course I'm not saying that you need drugs to have this insight, but to say that all drug use is harmful is to reduce a complicated issue to an overly simplistic platitude.
I view drug experiences in much the same way I view Jhana experiences. Clinging to either one can produce suffering, and neither one are enlightened activities in and of themselves. In fact, there is evidence that the effect that some drugs have on the brain is indistinguishable from deep meditative states. What is the difference whether the experience is induced from an external chemical, or an internal chemical?
Finally, I'll end with a link to this article http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/12/science/12psychedelics.html?src=me&ref=general:
Hmm, that sounds familiar.
When you practise Buddhism, you practise Buddhism.
When you take drugs, you cease to practise Buddhism.
Your Buddhist practise is at times temporary.
Only an arahant practises Buddhism 100% of the time.
Thus your statement "i consider myself a practicing buddhist" is not completely accurate.
It is a delusion many meditators have when the get over-excited via attachment.
Real jhana is born of non-attachment.
Jhana and drugs cannot be compared to eachother in any shape or form.
There is really only Dharma Dhatuism
What I am saying is aside from the above debate there are many people who are not ready to get off drugs and alcohol yet. Not all people who drink are 'alcoholics' for one thing. But of course probably it would be benefitial to quit. Yet it is hard to quit. Not easy. I don't see any good coming of calling them 'not buddhists' for something.
We are all flawed human beings and I am sure 50% percent of the posts on the forum could just be criticizing eachother for non-buddhist behaviour which in itself would not be constructive behaviour.
I don't mind if someone wants a dialogue of why I drink and how that is in my life but I don't need some to slap me with the 'not real buddhist' label. It just seems very petty.
It does make sense why aggressions overwhelm compassion, clouding our senses, but it also makes sense how not to let this happen. Especially when people talk about things we do not believe in... what a fine moment this is to accept multiple views on how things are!
When the lama visits us, she is the first with her head at his feet.
Her self acknowledged practise is guru yoga.
This is a form of dharma, in the broad sense of the word.
I also meditate. I suppose that means I am a meditationist
I could have been acting as a 'temporary buddhist' and possibly it was an #%&$!
I received a certificate from the same lama which certified i was a buddhist...
we committed ourselves to one precept of not killing...
Intoxicant; a substance that stupifies/excites/stimulates/poisons http://www.answers.com/topic/intoxicate
Heedlessness; paying little care/attention/unmindful/thoughtless
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/heedless
Definition of a drug; A drug, broadly speaking, is any substance that, when absorbed into the body of a living organism, alters normal bodily function.
In pharmacology, a drug is "a chemical substance used in the treatment, cure, prevention, or diagnosis of disease or used to otherwise enhance physical or mental well-being
Recreational drugs are chemical substances that affect the central nervous system, such as opioids or hallucinogens.They may be used for perceived beneficial effects on perception, consciousness, personality, and behavior
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug
Caffeine; Caffeine is a bitter, white crystalline xanthin alkaloid that is a psychoactive stimulant drug
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caffeine
Cannabis; The major psychoactive chemical compound in cannabis is Δ<SUP>9</SUP>-tetrahydrocannabinol (commonly abbreviated as THC).... While many drugs clearly fall into the category of either stimulant, depressant, or hallucinogen, cannabis exhibits a mix of all properties, perhaps leaning the most towards hallucinogen or psychedelic properties, though with other effects quite pronounced as well.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marijuana
"Magic mushrooms"; AKA psilocybin mushrooms... Psilocybin (also known as psilocybine) is a hallucinogenic (entheogenic, psychedelic) indole of the tryptamine family...Once ingested, psilocybin is rapidly metabolised to psilocin, which then acts as a partial agonist at the 5-HT<SUB>2A</SUB> and 5-HT<SUB>1A</SUB> serotonin receptors in the brain. The mind-altering effects of psilocybin typically last anywhere from 3 to 8 hours; however, to individuals under the influence of psilocybin, the effects may seem to last much longer, since the drug can distort the perception of time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psilocybin
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_mushrooms
Cocaine; Cocaine (benzoylmethylecgonine) is a crystalline tropane alkaloid that is obtained from the leaves of the coca plant. The name comes from "coca" in addition to the alkaloid suffix -ine, forming cocaine. It is a stimulant of the central nervous system and an appetite suppressant
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cocaine
Ok, that was a lot of information so let me break it down....
The western definition of a drug includes all the above (and many more). All these substances alter normal bodily function.
The Buddha never used the word "drugs" but said "intoxicants that cause heedlessness". Looking at the above we see the definition of intoxicant, and this definition includes caffeine as an intoxicant as well as all the others including cannibis and mushrooms.
So, we can safely say that, according to Buddhism, the above substances are intoxicants..... But the buddha went on to say "...that cause heedlessness..." so which ones of the above drugs cause heedlessness. Well, in the right doses, they all do!
So what is one to do?... Abstain http://www.thefreedictionary.com/abstain ask yourself, "am I in need of this?/do I require it?" or is it recreational?
I'm sure the Buddha would not tell someone to stop taking any of the above drugs if they truly required them. In fact, I'm sure I've read a sutta in which the Buddha told his followers to take medicine if required (perhaps the sutta-pitaka encycopidia that is Dhamma-Dhatu or Jason might help on that one?)
I included cocaine in that because cocaine is a natural drug. In parts of Brazil and Mexico, the locals chew the leaves to gain similar effects as cocaine. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coca
Nios.
In nature, there are poisons. Many plants & animals are poisonous.
Nature has ways to keep things in balance.
Some natural drugs are poisonous in nature. Some natural drugs are medicinal in nature.
There's far too much erroneous comparison with drug highs and Buddhist meditation in general. When I was at university I smoked cannabis and experimented with all kinds of drugs including various hallucinogenics. I had no ill effects from them and eventually had the sense to stop because it was obviously a dead end occupation -and I saw some scary casualties too.
There's absolutely no comparison to Jhana or any other experience in Buddhist practice. I'm astonished that there's so much emphasis on the supposed benefits of drug highs with posters here at this forum recently.
May you all be well and happy.
.