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 wasn't teaching anything. There is nobody on this forum who is teaching. Not even the monks who participate in the forum are teachers AFAIK. I was stating my feelings.
All of the Buddhist teachings are for the purpose of ending suffering. If we take them in any other light, we lose them. The precepts are here to help us, not to imprison us. Sure we can break them all, even disregard them, but then we do not reap the benefits. Even if we awaken, it is best to keep them because we know that those actions lead to suffering. If we don't know that these actions lead to suffering, then we're still deluded and have work to do.
I went to the link and it got scary, says the website has been "hacked."
I edited the link I copied above with x to be safe.
Sorry about that! About a year ago, I visited that site and received the same message, then wondered why someone would hack the Plum Village site. Thanks for the caution.
Human beings have had a relationship with marijuana for thousands of years. It is only within the last one hundred years that it has been demonized and made illegal.
As a professional musician I used marijuana for many years and I found that, on the positive side, it helped me to be "in the moment" - the only thing that mattered was the single note that I was playing at the time.
After a long drive to get to the gig there were times when my fellow band mates and I would be at odds with each other. Once all the work of driving and setting up were over, if we smoked a joint, we would wonder what all the fuss was about and just focus on performing the music.
Since I stopped using I have found my guitar solos to be much more precise and concise but less inspired. I have also found that I can now remove the "fuss" from my mind just by removing the fuss. It is still possible to arrive at the point where nothing else matters except the note that I am playing however there is more work involved in getting there. Meditation works very well for me in this regard.
All of that being said, I believe marijuana is a shortcut to getting "there" but it makes a person lazy in the sense that one would not develop skills such as meditation. I also think it leads to a sense of contentment before a person actually reaches their potential. There are also side effects such as a general "clouding" which I would see as being counter productive in developing the mind.
I do think that occasional use of mind altering drugs - such as a single LSD experience - can help a person get "unstuck" from certain mindsets that are holding them back. There are risks involved and it would be better to learn from a skilled teacher.
I also have problems with the fifth precept. I like to drink a lot and it gives me trouble. I also have this constant struggle going on in me. When I stop drinking I feel happy and great, but have this thought in my mind that I want to be miserable again. But when I am drinking on a regular basis I want to be sober. It's a constant struggle. I also have this fear of what will other people say about me if I stopped drinking. How do I approach those difficulties?
In short (very short, and in it's shortness even wrong on some levels but it's only expressed correctly if you read it) it's a book written by Aldous Huxley about his experience with mescaline. During this experience he says he can comprehend the buddhist meaning of suchness, the hindu concept of Satchitananda, etc. alot better than before. He sees things as they really are without being influenced by his own experience, he can experience the beauty of a simple thing like a normal flower in an almost indescribable way.
Taken from wikipedia and the book: After lunch and the drive to the WBDS he returns home and to his ordinary state of mind. His final insight is taken from Buddhist scripture: that within sameness there is difference, although that difference is not different from sameness.
In the field of religion, Huxley’s friend and spiritual mentor, the Vedantic monk Swami Prabhavananda, thought that mescaline was an illegitimate path to enlightenment, a "deadly heresy" as Christopher Isherwood put it.
Do most people here feel the same way about this? Or do you feel that if it helped him understand buddhism better and made him a better person, that this isn't a misstep at all, as long as he doesn't keep relying on mescaline to get closer to spiritual freedom?
In short (very short, and in it's shortness even wrong on some levels but it's only expressed correctly if you read it) it's a book written by Aldous Huxley about his experience with mescaline. During this experience he says he can comprehend the buddhist meaning of suchness, the hindu concept of Satchitananda, etc. alot better than before. He sees things as they really are without being influenced by his own experience, he can experience the beauty of a simple thing like a normal flower in an almost indescribable way.
Taken from wikipedia and the book: After lunch and the drive to the WBDS he returns home and to his ordinary state of mind. His final insight is taken from Buddhist scripture: that within sameness there is difference, although that difference is not different from sameness.
In the field of religion, Huxley’s friend and spiritual mentor, the Vedantic monk Swami Prabhavananda, thought that mescaline was an illegitimate path to enlightenment, a "deadly heresy" as Christopher Isherwood put it.
Do most people here feel the same way about this? Or do you feel that if it helped him understand buddhism better and made him a better person, that this isn't a misstep at all, as long as he doesn't keep relying on mescaline to get closer to spiritual freedom?
Huxley was a born a member of the upper class, a brilliant writer and advocate later in life of psychodelics as a mind freeing method, but don't forget early in his career he wrote "Brave New World", a devastating criticism of intoxicant drugs as a behavior and mood altering method. His description of the effects of "soma" in creating the false utopia are exactly those of pot, only in pill form, and he would have been exposed to the drug in his social circles at the time.
Later in life he did end up in America as part of the pre-hippie, well to do intelligencia that experimented with LSD. He also followed a Hindu Swami who teached a higher consciousness, and advocated Utilitarianism, or a moral concept of "greatest good for the greatest number of people" as the only needed rule in society. His book about this imagined society, "Island" showed he was definitely into wishful thinking by this time on the truth of human nature.
In short, he was a successful author with a wild imagination, and didn't self-destruct like many rich, bored people of that time, but on the other hand he didn't really prove by example or argument that psychodelics made any improvement in the spiritual understanding of the users. People who don't have to struggle for a living can have a hard time penetrating the reality of suffering.
Yes, A Brave New World stands directly opposed to Island in those ways and it does seem a bit oppertunistic of me to mention Island but not mentioning ABNW. Thanks for adding this.
I wouldn't describe "Island" as wishful thinking however, I don't wish to spoil the book for people who might read it but those that have will probably know what I mean. Doesn't this change in his writing mean he has become more in touch with Buddhism or atleast the buddhistic way of looking at life then?
Isn't suffering the same to all people? Surely if you compare the struggle of people some will find more harshness than others, but can we say that people with a good life can't suffer as hard as people who need to struggle for a living? What I mean is, isn't the level of suffering defined in the experience and thus not compareable?
*edit* I notice I haven't even mentioned Island in this thread, so sorry for the confusion. ^^
Yes, A Brave New World stands directly opposed to Island in those ways and it does seem a bit oppertunistic of me to mention Island but not mentioning ABNW. Thanks for adding this.
I wouldn't describe "Island" as wishful thinking however, I don't wish to spoil the book for people who might read it but those that have will probably know what I mean. Doesn't this change in his writing mean he has become more in touch with Buddhism or atleast the buddhistic way of looking at life then?
Isn't suffering the same to all people? Surely if you compare the struggle of people some will find more harshness than others, but can we say that people with a good life can't suffer as hard as people who need to struggle for a living? What I mean is, isn't the level of suffering defined in the experience and thus not compareable?
Well, he was trying to make a case for a real, possible utopia with "Island". I'll try not to give spoilers because people really should read this along with Brave New World to see how a writer matures. The so-called hippy type counter culture tried creating enlightened societies and discovered that mind expansion can't compete with basic human selfish nature once people actually try to get along and work together. Somehow, expanding your mind and doing your own thing never includes a desire to take out other people's trash without feeling resentful. So I'd have to call it a fantasy along the lines of Shangra La or any other tale of a perfect society, but that's just my opinion.
As for the other question about all suffering being comparable, I have to admit you're right, all classes of society suffer in spite of money and luxury. I didn't do a very good job explaining myself. I meant that people's experiences have a profound effect on their view of the world. Would Gautama have ever become the Buddha if he'd never left the comforts of a rich family life? Even as a Prince, he suffered. But, the life of a Prince didn't give him the experience needed to understand why. So the personal suffering is the same, but experience matters in understanding the suffering of others. Does that make sense?
Huxley always struck me as the kind of man who would have been impressed by the Swami's Hindu teachings, but too independent to give up his own opinions and embrace the teaching, especially when it came to self-discipline. And, that's pretty much what happened when it came to the LSD, according to biographies. The Swami had strong views against using it.
I tried to learn about the man when I first read BNW, because it was a pioneering work of social sciencefiction. When I discovered his other writings, it made him even more fascinating.
I took a lot of English and literature courses in college. That and a dollar will get me a cup of coffee in today's world. Fortunately, I never had to earn a living with this knowledge. I do publish short stories and a few novels, but I'll never be famous or earn a living from it, near as I can tell.
Do most people here feel the same way about this? Or do you feel that if it helped him understand buddhism better and made him a better person, that this isn't a misstep at all, as long as he doesn't keep relying on mescaline to get closer to spiritual freedom?
I'm not sure AH got insights into Buddhism proper. He definitely got insights into buddhism (small B.) just like those insights might be accurately applied to any religion or devout practice; perhaps even high-level sports performance or even the intuitive, wholistic experience of art-making or musical performance.
I have no problem with experiencing hallucinogens once or twice in a lifetime. It's definitely a learning experience (problem is using the stuff safely is almost impossible).
I have to define "intoxicants" as stuff which you take and makes you stupider, less well-functioning over time. The word toxic is a clue, is it not? Aspirin is toxic if you take too much, but it's also helpful if the "middle way" is followed with aspirin use. I dunno. Just talkin'
"I also have problems with the fifth precept. I like to drink a lot and it gives me trouble. I also have this constant struggle going on in me. When I stop drinking I feel happy and great, but have this thought in my mind that I want to be miserable again. But when I am drinking on a regular basis I want to be sober. It's a constant struggle. I also have this fear of what will other people say about me if I stopped drinking. How do I approach those difficulties?"
That sounds a lot like me. Mindfulness can help you a lot because a lot of the thinking is sabotaging you. By mindfulness I mean not vigilance exactly though that would be nice but its more like waking up from a dream to reality as it is rather than as we think it is. In this context when the thought came up to be miserable more often as your mindfulness grows you would realize that you did not have to obey that voice.
I also understand about other people. What I found is you have to make the closest most meaningful and caring people understand that the drinking is making you suffer. Most people with any maturity can understand that in time. Then just it takes time for the satellite people who you could not address so directly to adjust to you as a nondrinker.
This is another time when mindfulness helps because you can just sit on the dot with the anxiety that having people pressure you or misunderstand you creates. Don't know how to explain exactly.
In my case I was addicted to the time waste, filling time. And the sense of a treat. But I didn't really like to be clouded and drunken at least not coming down or past the point of climbing to the high.
For this reason drinking non-alcoholic beer really helped me quit because psychologically having 'a drink' in my hand helped me not go apeshit. I didn't get drunk but since I was addicted to a treat and a time filler non-alcoholic beer fit the bill.
Good luck and remember that condemning yourself only makes things worse, which is not to say that indulging is the right choice either. 12 steps (I didn't do) people tell me has some hidden buddhist wisdom. But for me mindfulness that I have built up and NA beer did the trick.
If taking mescaline is compassion (true) then it is also wisdom. But if it is just a sense indulgence to become attached to (or state of mind) then it is suffering.
To think that drugs are bad and counter-productive to one's life is merely an opinion. To think that being an alcoholic is bad is another opinion. To believe that smoking pot everyday is a great thing, is also merely the ego's need to label things as good and bad.
Nothing can be labeled as good or bad. It just is. The universe and everything that happens in it can be nothing but perfect.
If you want to incorporate drugs into your Buddhist practice then do it. If you don't then don't. The need to convince others that your view is the correct one is the ego rearing its head.
The original question was what is the Buddha's opinion on intoxicants. He was against them because he came to the conclusion that they took away from mindfulness. However, that doesn't mean you should follow the advice blindly.
So once again, I will say think and decide for yourself.
I am not "anti-drug", but rather "pro-mindfulness".
I like this approach.
PS- I think if the Buddha were alive today his list of things he would count as "intoxicants" would be lengthy, and would include American Idol, so-called news programs, online porn, and anything having to do with Miley Cyrus.
"I also have problems with the fifth precept. I like to drink a lot and it gives me trouble. I also have this constant struggle going on in me. When I stop drinking I feel happy and great, but have this thought in my mind that I want to be miserable again. But when I am drinking on a regular basis I want to be sober. It's a constant struggle. I also have this fear of what will other people say about me if I stopped drinking. How do I approach those difficulties?"
That sounds a lot like me. Mindfulness can help you a lot because a lot of the thinking is sabotaging you. By mindfulness I mean not vigilance exactly though that would be nice but its more like waking up from a dream to reality as it is rather than as we think it is. In this context when the thought came up to be miserable more often as your mindfulness grows you would realize that you did not have to obey that voice.
I also understand about other people. What I found is you have to make the closest most meaningful and caring people understand that the drinking is making you suffer. Most people with any maturity can understand that in time. Then just it takes time for the satellite people who you could not address so directly to adjust to you as a nondrinker.
This is another time when mindfulness helps because you can just sit on the dot with the anxiety that having people pressure you or misunderstand you creates. Don't know how to explain exactly.
In my case I was addicted to the time waste, filling time. And the sense of a treat. But I didn't really like to be clouded and drunken at least not coming down or past the point of climbing to the high.
For this reason drinking non-alcoholic beer really helped me quit because psychologically having 'a drink' in my hand helped me not go apeshit. I didn't get drunk but since I was addicted to a treat and a time filler non-alcoholic beer fit the bill.
Good luck and remember that condemning yourself only makes things worse, which is not to say that indulging is the right choice either. 12 steps (I didn't do) people tell me has some hidden buddhist wisdom. But for me mindfulness that I have built up and NA beer did the trick.
Thanks Jeffrey. Yeah it seems it all comes down to my mind sabotaging me as always. Maybe with practice and dettachment I will come closer to beeing sober. I don't know about you but in our country (Slovenia) non alcoholic beers taste like shit:)
It took some time for me. First I reduced a lot and went from drinking every day and binging every week. Then that went down a lot with a cold turkey cool off. Then it creeped up on me again and I was not drinking for a week then binging. Then I stopped binging and drank every day again but my tolerance was getting high and I couldn't get to bed. I knew the next step was hard liquor and eventually death.
I hope you have a clarity of what you are doing at some point. You are already aware of some of the mental process. When you know your mind is just playing tricks on you eventually you see through it and stop obeying your urges. It does take some patience. The best type of meditation if you are lucky enough is uncomfortable meditation mixed with some times of relief. At least thats how it goes for me. This teaches me that I can just sit with something and not have to react to it.
But it takes time. And part of the process is to make mistakes so don't let guilt sabotage your good heart.
I buy a good kind of NA beer called Kaliber that is made by guiness. There is also slightly cheaper american pisswater NA beer however haha. I drink that too haha. Decaf coffee if you are a coffee drinker can also scratch the itch.
Sunflower seeds or raisins while not a liquid thus not as satisfying also satisfy the oral thing.
In my opinion, as long as you are able to maintain mindfulness under the drugs influence it is not a problem.
In Buddhism, the term 'mindfulness' refers to recollecting 'right view'. Concerning drugs, Buddha advised to regard drugs as dangerous is 'right view'. Buddha regarded taking drugs as 'wrong action'. Many have practised & verified the Buddha's path. Drugs were not required.
All the best
"One tries to abandon wrong action & to enter into right action: This is one's right effort. One is mindful to abandon wrong action & to enter & remain in right action: This is one's right mindfulness. Thus these three qualities — right view, right effort, & right mindfulness — run & circle around right action.
Once you find the ultimate truth of reality the precepts might as well go right out the window anyway.
I don't mean that they shouldn't be used as a general guide for being a good person and such, but I mean once enlightened you can see just how fake reality actually is. You can go out and slaughter puppies And shoot people in cold blood... It doesn't matter. The point is that once you have truth, you probably wouldn't want to because you'd only be hurting yourself anyway.
Hi Minty
You actually correctly refuted your prior illogical reasoning.
Enlightened beings do not kill nor do they take drugs. Enlightened beings simply have no motive.
I believe even the dahlia Llama said something to the effect that life should not be taken so seriously.
Think for yourself.
If you are taking drugs, you are obviously taking life very seriously. People generally take drugs because their minds have discontentment or they are hooked on the high or pleasure. So when people take drugs, they are taking that 'discontentment' or 'getting high' very seriously.
For example, people stuck on drugs roam the streets, pubs or nightclubs looking to score. Their quest is very serious. They will walk into a nightclub & ask anyone: "Hey dude, can I score off you?" That dude may be an undercover policeman but the person is taking their life so seriously, they must score. They are on a mission.
Worse, drug addicts steal, break into houses and have even been known to murder people in robberies. Why? Because they are taking their craving for drugs very seriously.
My opinion is you have misinterpretated the Dahlia Llama.
Right view is a deep understanding of the 4 noble truths. Not necessarily drinking or not drinking.
If your going to drink anyways its a good time to examine craving and suffering. The compassion to understand for yourself must come from right view. The path is the fruition.
I could be wrong anyways you might as well learn something if you haven't yet decided its right to quit. Through awareness.
In Buddhism, the term 'mindfulness' refers to recollecting 'right view'. Concerning drugs, Buddha advised to regard drugs as dangerous is 'right view'. Buddha regarded taking drugs as 'wrong action'. Many have practised & verified the Buddha's path. Drugs were not required.
As always, more words of wisdom from DD in the midst of confusion !
I smoked for the first time in about 6 months yesterday and today I feel like smoking again. This is caused by dependent origination. Contact has led to sensation has led to craving, which will lead to attachment which will lead to becoming.
I know that I shouldn't have smoked because of this cycle leading to suffering, but I'm not going to beat myself up over it. I didn't do anything while high to break any other precepts, in fact I had an engaging conversation with a friend of mine who is entering a catholic monastary later this week to begin his noviciary. He was drinking a beer while talking to me.
You can't try to make recreational drugs more or less that what they are, RECREATIONAL. I stopped smoking months ago because I was tired of spending so much damn money on the habit, and needed an opportunity to step back and see what it was doing to my life. In regards to my outlook and personality, I'm still the same person now that I was when I was smoking daily, just with a little more money in my pocket and a clearer head.
In regards to psychedelics, I wouldn't have taken such a strong interest in Buddhist theory and practice, if it weren't for being introduced to the psychedelic handbook (Leary's translation of the Tibetan Book of the Dead) and correlated it to the mushroom experiences I was having at the time. I can't put to words properly the kinds of experiences I have had in the past while "under the influence" except to say that I do not regret them and that they helped shape who I am today.
The way I look at it now though, is similar to the way that the Buddha became disillusioned by his instructors while seeking the truth. He had attained powerful states of mind, and deep insights into the nature of form and consiousness, but after these experiences were over, his suffering remained. I have had sincere and profound religious experiences while tripping, but after the effects wore off, the weight and grim reality of my own stress, anxiety, worry, attachment and despair, as well as the ongoing suffering of others reclaimed it's seat in my heart and mind.
I am not going to judge myself or others for the use of "intoxicants." All I can do is intelligently analyze my experience, and continue to put forth effort toward improving myself and helping others.
I'm obviously not the best buddhist in the world. In fact..I've only been involved for about four months. I think one should approach drugs in alcohol in a similar way that one would approach most other pleasures in life. This is of course, my opinion alone.
I find some things more important than other things...for instance.. I think one might be more concerned with reducing or stopping their consumption of animal products and practicing overall compassion to others around them etc before one were to judge whether they should smoke pot from time to time. I realize that the over use of drugs and alcohol may lead a person to cause harm to others around them either directly or indirectly..but the word over use should be read. Personally, I smoke marijuana from time to time..I also drink in relative moderation. I would probably use mushrooms, LSD etc..
If anything..marijuana has been good at one thing..allowing me to see faults even more highlighted in myself. This is a good and bad thing..it's uncomfortable and has made some of the "highs" very troublesome. But it has always left me with a want to change myself for the better afterwards. I know of certain close friends who have used LSD or mushrooms and have had deep, meaningful experiences and have come out more intune to the needs of others around them and less selfish. But drugs affect everyone differently.
I truly feel the key is having control over ones mind and ones emotions, then one is less likely to ever even become close to addicted. Also..there are certain drugs which can be beneficial spiritually or emotionally at times..and certain drugs which are void of any practical spiritual use. Cocaine is an example of a drug which tends to be more destructive than anything else. My personal words here are not a recommendation to use drugs..nor are they a rejection of the precepts. The precept is pretty clear and one would certainly be better off following those words than my words.
My understanding is that once you take a vow, you're expected to keep it, and the 5th precept means no using intoxicants, not, as some people have said, using them moderately, short of heedlessness. If you can't keep the vow, don't take the vow. You're not required to take the vow. According to a number of books and articles I've read on the subject, you can take just one vow, or all ten, its up to you, unless a monk or lama gives you the vows, in which case if you know you won't be able to keep one of the vows, best to not take vows from a monk. Don't bite off more than you can chew. Better to take one vow and keep it, than to take 5, but not keep some. It's intended to be a spiritual discipline. The vows are not to be tailored to each practitioner's preferences.
Comments
http://www.gaarde.org/Acronyms/
@All, Concerning Precepts (to my knowledge):
All of the Buddhist teachings are for the purpose of ending suffering. If we take them in any other light, we lose them. The precepts are here to help us, not to imprison us. Sure we can break them all, even disregard them, but then we do not reap the benefits. Even if we awaken, it is best to keep them because we know that those actions lead to suffering. If we don't know that these actions lead to suffering, then we're still deluded and have work to do.
Namaste
As a professional musician I used marijuana for many years and I found that, on the positive side, it helped me to be "in the moment" - the only thing that mattered was the single note that I was playing at the time.
After a long drive to get to the gig there were times when my fellow band mates and I would be at odds with each other. Once all the work of driving and setting up were over, if we smoked a joint, we would wonder what all the fuss was about and just focus on performing the music.
Since I stopped using I have found my guitar solos to be much more precise and concise but less inspired. I have also found that I can now remove the "fuss" from my mind just by removing the fuss. It is still possible to arrive at the point where nothing else matters except the note that I am playing however there is more work involved in getting there. Meditation works very well for me in this regard.
All of that being said, I believe marijuana is a shortcut to getting "there" but it makes a person lazy in the sense that one would not develop skills such as meditation. I also think it leads to a sense of contentment before a person actually reaches their potential. There are also side effects such as a general "clouding" which I would see as being counter productive in developing the mind.
I do think that occasional use of mind altering drugs - such as a single LSD experience - can help a person get "unstuck" from certain mindsets that are holding them back. There are risks involved and it would be better to learn from a skilled teacher.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Doors_of_Perception
In short (very short, and in it's shortness even wrong on some levels but it's only expressed correctly if you read it) it's a book written by Aldous Huxley about his experience with mescaline. During this experience he says he can comprehend the buddhist meaning of suchness, the hindu concept of Satchitananda, etc. alot better than before. He sees things as they really are without being influenced by his own experience, he can experience the beauty of a simple thing like a normal flower in an almost indescribable way.
Taken from wikipedia and the book:
After lunch and the drive to the WBDS he returns home and to his ordinary state of mind. His final insight is taken from Buddhist scripture: that within sameness there is difference, although that difference is not different from sameness.
In the field of religion, Huxley’s friend and spiritual mentor, the Vedantic monk Swami Prabhavananda, thought that mescaline was an illegitimate path to enlightenment, a "deadly heresy" as Christopher Isherwood put it.
Do most people here feel the same way about this? Or do you feel that if it helped him understand buddhism better and made him a better person, that this isn't a misstep at all, as long as he doesn't keep relying on mescaline to get closer to spiritual freedom?
Later in life he did end up in America as part of the pre-hippie, well to do intelligencia that experimented with LSD. He also followed a Hindu Swami who teached a higher consciousness, and advocated Utilitarianism, or a moral concept of "greatest good for the greatest number of people" as the only needed rule in society. His book about this imagined society, "Island" showed he was definitely into wishful thinking by this time on the truth of human nature.
In short, he was a successful author with a wild imagination, and didn't self-destruct like many rich, bored people of that time, but on the other hand he didn't really prove by example or argument that psychodelics made any improvement in the spiritual understanding of the users. People who don't have to struggle for a living can have a hard time penetrating the reality of suffering.
I wouldn't describe "Island" as wishful thinking however, I don't wish to spoil the book for people who might read it but those that have will probably know what I mean. Doesn't this change in his writing mean he has become more in touch with Buddhism or atleast the buddhistic way of looking at life then?
Isn't suffering the same to all people? Surely if you compare the struggle of people some will find more harshness than others, but can we say that people with a good life can't suffer as hard as people who need to struggle for a living? What I mean is, isn't the level of suffering defined in the experience and thus not compareable?
*edit* I notice I haven't even mentioned Island in this thread, so sorry for the confusion. ^^
As for the other question about all suffering being comparable, I have to admit you're right, all classes of society suffer in spite of money and luxury. I didn't do a very good job explaining myself. I meant that people's experiences have a profound effect on their view of the world. Would Gautama have ever become the Buddha if he'd never left the comforts of a rich family life? Even as a Prince, he suffered. But, the life of a Prince didn't give him the experience needed to understand why. So the personal suffering is the same, but experience matters in understanding the suffering of others. Does that make sense?
Huxley always struck me as the kind of man who would have been impressed by the Swami's Hindu teachings, but too independent to give up his own opinions and embrace the teaching, especially when it came to self-discipline. And, that's pretty much what happened when it came to the LSD, according to biographies. The Swami had strong views against using it.
I tried to learn about the man when I first read BNW, because it was a pioneering work of social sciencefiction. When I discovered his other writings, it made him even more fascinating.
I have no problem with experiencing hallucinogens once or twice in a lifetime. It's definitely a learning experience (problem is using the stuff safely is almost impossible).
I have to define "intoxicants" as stuff which you take and makes you stupider, less well-functioning over time. The word toxic is a clue, is it not? Aspirin is toxic if you take too much, but it's also helpful if the "middle way" is followed with aspirin use. I dunno. Just talkin'
That sounds a lot like me. Mindfulness can help you a lot because a lot of the thinking is sabotaging you. By mindfulness I mean not vigilance exactly though that would be nice but its more like waking up from a dream to reality as it is rather than as we think it is. In this context when the thought came up to be miserable more often as your mindfulness grows you would realize that you did not have to obey that voice.
I also understand about other people. What I found is you have to make the closest most meaningful and caring people understand that the drinking is making you suffer. Most people with any maturity can understand that in time. Then just it takes time for the satellite people who you could not address so directly to adjust to you as a nondrinker.
This is another time when mindfulness helps because you can just sit on the dot with the anxiety that having people pressure you or misunderstand you creates. Don't know how to explain exactly.
In my case I was addicted to the time waste, filling time. And the sense of a treat. But I didn't really like to be clouded and drunken at least not coming down or past the point of climbing to the high.
For this reason drinking non-alcoholic beer really helped me quit because psychologically having 'a drink' in my hand helped me not go apeshit. I didn't get drunk but since I was addicted to a treat and a time filler non-alcoholic beer fit the bill.
Good luck and remember that condemning yourself only makes things worse, which is not to say that indulging is the right choice either. 12 steps (I didn't do) people tell me has some hidden buddhist wisdom. But for me mindfulness that I have built up and NA beer did the trick.
To think that drugs are bad and counter-productive to one's life is merely an opinion. To think that being an alcoholic is bad is another opinion. To believe that smoking pot everyday is a great thing, is also merely the ego's need to label things as good and bad.
Nothing can be labeled as good or bad. It just is. The universe and everything that happens in it can be nothing but perfect.
If you want to incorporate drugs into your Buddhist practice then do it. If you don't then don't. The need to convince others that your view is the correct one is the ego rearing its head.
The original question was what is the Buddha's opinion on intoxicants. He was against them because he came to the conclusion that they took away from mindfulness. However, that doesn't mean you should follow the advice blindly.
So once again, I will say think and decide for yourself.
PS- I think if the Buddha were alive today his list of things he would count as "intoxicants" would be lengthy, and would include American Idol, so-called news programs, online porn, and anything having to do with Miley Cyrus.
I hope you have a clarity of what you are doing at some point. You are already aware of some of the mental process. When you know your mind is just playing tricks on you eventually you see through it and stop obeying your urges. It does take some patience. The best type of meditation if you are lucky enough is uncomfortable meditation mixed with some times of relief. At least thats how it goes for me. This teaches me that I can just sit with something and not have to react to it.
But it takes time. And part of the process is to make mistakes so don't let guilt sabotage your good heart.
Sunflower seeds or raisins while not a liquid thus not as satisfying also satisfy the oral thing.
All the best
You actually correctly refuted your prior illogical reasoning.
Enlightened beings do not kill nor do they take drugs. Enlightened beings simply have no motive.
All the best
DD
For example, people stuck on drugs roam the streets, pubs or nightclubs looking to score. Their quest is very serious. They will walk into a nightclub & ask anyone: "Hey dude, can I score off you?" That dude may be an undercover policeman but the person is taking their life so seriously, they must score. They are on a mission.
Worse, drug addicts steal, break into houses and have even been known to murder people in robberies. Why? Because they are taking their craving for drugs very seriously.
My opinion is you have misinterpretated the Dahlia Llama.
If your going to drink anyways its a good time to examine craving and suffering. The compassion to understand for yourself must come from right view. The path is the fruition.
I could be wrong anyways you might as well learn something if you haven't yet decided its right to quit. Through awareness.
I know that I shouldn't have smoked because of this cycle leading to suffering, but I'm not going to beat myself up over it. I didn't do anything while high to break any other precepts, in fact I had an engaging conversation with a friend of mine who is entering a catholic monastary later this week to begin his noviciary. He was drinking a beer while talking to me.
You can't try to make recreational drugs more or less that what they are, RECREATIONAL. I stopped smoking months ago because I was tired of spending so much damn money on the habit, and needed an opportunity to step back and see what it was doing to my life. In regards to my outlook and personality, I'm still the same person now that I was when I was smoking daily, just with a little more money in my pocket and a clearer head.
In regards to psychedelics, I wouldn't have taken such a strong interest in Buddhist theory and practice, if it weren't for being introduced to the psychedelic handbook (Leary's translation of the Tibetan Book of the Dead) and correlated it to the mushroom experiences I was having at the time. I can't put to words properly the kinds of experiences I have had in the past while "under the influence" except to say that I do not regret them and that they helped shape who I am today.
The way I look at it now though, is similar to the way that the Buddha became disillusioned by his instructors while seeking the truth. He had attained powerful states of mind, and deep insights into the nature of form and consiousness, but after these experiences were over, his suffering remained. I have had sincere and profound religious experiences while tripping, but after the effects wore off, the weight and grim reality of my own stress, anxiety, worry, attachment and despair, as well as the ongoing suffering of others reclaimed it's seat in my heart and mind.
I am not going to judge myself or others for the use of "intoxicants." All I can do is intelligently analyze my experience, and continue to put forth effort toward improving myself and helping others.
Namaste
I find some things more important than other things...for instance.. I think one might be more concerned with reducing or stopping their consumption of animal products and practicing overall compassion to others around them etc before one were to judge whether they should smoke pot from time to time. I realize that the over use of drugs and alcohol may lead a person to cause harm to others around them either directly or indirectly..but the word over use should be read. Personally, I smoke marijuana from time to time..I also drink in relative moderation. I would probably use mushrooms, LSD etc..
If anything..marijuana has been good at one thing..allowing me to see faults even more highlighted in myself. This is a good and bad thing..it's uncomfortable and has made some of the "highs" very troublesome. But it has always left me with a want to change myself for the better afterwards. I know of certain close friends who have used LSD or mushrooms and have had deep, meaningful experiences and have come out more intune to the needs of others around them and less selfish. But drugs affect everyone differently.
I truly feel the key is having control over ones mind and ones emotions, then one is less likely to ever even become close to addicted. Also..there are certain drugs which can be beneficial spiritually or emotionally at times..and certain drugs which are void of any practical spiritual use. Cocaine is an example of a drug which tends to be more destructive than anything else. My personal words here are not a recommendation to use drugs..nor are they a rejection of the precepts. The precept is pretty clear and one would certainly be better off following those words than my words.